User talk:Seicer/Archive 2
Reply
Thank you for pointing out my typing error on my user page. I am very bad for such errors and spelling errors, its been so bad in the past I have been accused of vandalism. American Brit 21:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Ghost talk
Hi, Seicer!
I'm wondering what you meant by "citation?" at the British and American spelling vote on the Talk:Ghost page. Could you clarify?
Thanks, DBlomgren 03:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Nelogism, one again...
Please address the issues (vis-a-vis the "unused highway" neologism) before removing the tags again - this new issue was not discussed in prior AfDs - in fact the second "Ghost ramp" AfD was improperly closed before the discussion past the "plea agreement" between you and NE2, and it needs to be addressed by a wider community. 147.70.236.93 22:22, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Very nice job cleaning up that article, especially the Controversy section. I wasn't sure anyone would have the resources to fix that one handy, and wasn't looking forward to the research involved. -- Kesh 05:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Why did you create this page? --NE2 03:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- Right now it's an AFD discussion with no reasons to delete... unless B.Wind adds a reason to delete to the top, it can be speedy kept. Did you add it to the appropriate AFD day? --NE2 03:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- When something is AFDed, it has to be added to the daily page; see the instructions on WP:AFD. --NE2 03:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Watermarked image found
First off let me say, you make some fine pictures!!! I was cataloging some of the Tuberculosis images at the commons, (specifically TB Sanatoria, which you seem quite familiar with). I have found one of your images with a watermark on it, not uploaded by you (presumably), which I marked for speedy delete before I knew you were a wikipedian. Here it is. If you have any questions let me know.--DO11.10 20:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Not again...
User:Pahighways vandalized my talk page and all. Could you check the contribs for image copyvios? I saw an image in the list. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 02:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Why do you say the Muhammad Ali quotation is unsourced?
It's sourced on the page, from a reputable publication, and the source says exactly what is quoted. Uucp 21:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- Responding to your point on my talk page, I'm not sure what you think is POV? Ali believes some kinds of segregation are natural law. Including that seems neutral. Excising it because it's controversial seems like POV. The libel rules require only that material like this be sourced, which this certainly is. Wordsmith it if you like, but I think it's fine. Uucp 21:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- Regarding your comment "this was clerified in the following paragraph which you conveniently left out." I sincerely have no idea what you are talking about. What paragraph? You seem to be accusing me of some kind of dishonesty, but I can't decipher what. Anyway, let's stick to the topic at hand. Ali believes that black people and while people don't naturally mix. He has said so to Sports Illustrated. The article quotes it and provides a citation. What's the big deal? If the article said "Ali is a bad person because..." that would be POV. But it just lists what he believes, which is perfectly appropriate. Uucp 21:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- Your revised text seems to be a step in the right direction, I'm going to make one small change which I think makes it more neutral. Uucp 21:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
FWIW, I have found Prof. Afshar to be a reasonable and well-tempered personality. Unfortunately, his ideas attract negaitve attention. I've attempted to mediate in the past, with little success. Danko should be barred from the talk page; he is incompetent on this subject matter (his knowledge is at the level of freshman physics). I have found Micheal C. Price, an editor I otherwise respect, to have crossed the line, repeatedly, in being uncivil, and in repeatedly adding his own original research in attempting to debunk (incorrectly) the Afshar experiment. I'm sorry to say, he should also probably be banned from that article, at least temporarily. Although it is difficult to wade through the arguments, for the most part I think Afshar has acted with nobility, and is not the party at fault here. (Full disclosure: yes, I've got a doctorate in quantum, yes, my initial reaction, like the rest of the world, was to disparage the topic. I've since warmed enough to it to realie that it should not dismissed out-of-hand; the arguments are subtle, and my impression is that the WP nay-sayers don't have the background to appreciate the subtlties.) linas 02:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding socks
Hey. I have a busted wrist due to an accident, would you mind being the individual to file it? :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 06:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. :) :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 06:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Sportman2 edits to Cincinnati article
I've been watching your back and forth with Sportman2 on the Cincinnati paragraph. I understand and support you effort to prevent unexplained deletions, but I note that Sportman2 is explaining them by claimng personal knowledge of error in a paragraph that is not supported by citation or other pointer that can verify its statements. I also think that the assertions there about segregated neighbohoods are overblown, perhaps subtling revealing a POV. On carefull examination they boil down to "some neighborhoods are segregated and some are not" and I don't see that as being different from any other US city of size. It seems to me that removing at least the back half of that paragraph is reasonable. Pzavon 03:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Either I completely bungled my explanation of my concern or you misread it, for your response on my User Talk page seems to be addressing something completely different from what I was looking at in the Cincinnati article. I'll address it more directly on my own. Pzavon 01:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
RfC for BWCNY
Good Evening. An RfC has been initiated for the actions of BWCNY at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/BWCNY. I noticed that you have attempted to help this user, I would like for you to be aware of this and please provide input on this RfC. Rob110178 00:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- It appears that he is still loitering around... Rob110178 01:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for the kind comments. Unfortunately, I will not be editing articles as of right now, due to lack of free time and my personal activities. Anyway, happy editing... bye ---BWCNY 02:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Citations
I noticed your disagreement with Stevietheman and wanted to help. Maybe I read your half of the discussion wrong but it seemed you were telling Stevietheman that citations are wasted space. If that is the case then I must warn you that not citing your sources can result in jail time. What you may be doing (I don't know if you are) is considered plagiarism, which is a serious offense.--Sportman2 21:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry! Like I said, I probably didn't read your half of the discussion right.--Sportman2 03:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
U.S. Roads Newsletter Issue #1
   The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 1 | 10 February 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 20:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Kentucky Wildcats - winningest team in college basketball
I am just wondering why you removed the statement that "The University of Kentucky men's basketball team is the all-time winningest team in college basketball history with 1,945 wins as of 2/20/07." It seems factual, verifiable, and relevant to the article. Cmadler 21:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Cmadler 13:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Starting making more edits...
...in the project space (discussions, XfDs, RfAs, etc) so I can nominate you for adminship in a few months. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 14:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
AfD on Straight blast
So anyone can add AfD with impunity without discussing it at first or at all? Please give a reasoning in the discussion page of the article. 207.202.227.125 21:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Re:Review for Ohio State Route 7
In my opinion, I think the Chesapeake Bypass and Proctorville Bypass section should combine and give a background on the whole road envision and how it came to be, it's the same bypass over two towns. Then subsection the Proctorville section with the info on construction and then a Chesapeake Bypass section with info on construction. I suggest give some recognition towards Ted Strickland and how he spearheaded the project and got the federal grants to construct the road and also how he calls the Chesapeake Bypass a priority while in the govenor's office. Spongefan 16:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry I've been away for a little while. I think the work on the bypasses looks good. I made some very minor changes, as it's my opinion (and not sure if it's correct or incorrect style) that abbreviations such as US and OH or SR should not be used in the "story" portion of the article...and actually OH should probably not be used at all (rather SR). Abbreviations (again IMHO) are okay for tables. So I expanded these to their full names. I have another style issue with wiki-ing the dates. I just don't like that, when it's referencing something like the building of a road. Something major in history, or the birth of a famous person, that's one thing...but not sure I like it on roads. I will refrain from changing that for now.
- Now, one final question...should we move all of the bypass sections down below the Auxiliary heading? I don't know why I didn't think of that before, but maybe they should be moved. Thoughts? — Homefryes Say•Do 12:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
U.S. Roads Newsletter Issue #2
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.
Apologies for the late delivery. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 05:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Greg Page Apartments (University of Kentucky)
An editor has nominated Greg Page Apartments (University of Kentucky), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Page Apartments (University of Kentucky) and 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. Thank you. 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. Jayden54Bot 20:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for adding the other violations for A Man in Black and Mjrmtg. I don't feel the greatest right now, so I didn't go through all their contribs. It's a serious issue indeed. RobJ1981 06:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
AfD
I just saw your comment on the AfD I listed. Too bad I didn't have you aroundabout three months ago --Descendall 01:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Scout gallery
Thanks, that's huge of you. It takes someone of great character to reevaluate their stance and publicly change their mind. Thanks. Chris 06:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Community AfD
You may want to look at the current version of the article and consider revising your opinion since the current version has multiple reliable sources including a note about a notable award the community has recieved. Thanks JoshuaZ 02:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
stub problems
The way it is around here now, the only safe way to create a new page or edit a stub is to do it either offline or in the sandbox in user space. This should not be necessary, and in fact was less necessary 6 months ago. But the increased number of WP editors finding new page patrol more to their taste than working on articles, seems to make it the only reliable way. (I am one of those who usually !votes to delete articles on elementary and middle schools, but I like to see fair play.) DGG 02:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 3
 The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 3 | 10 March 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.
Active user verification
Hello, Seicer. Due to the high number of inactive users at WP:USRD, we are asking that you verify that you are still an active contributor of the project. To do so, please add an asterisk (*) after your name on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter/List. Users without one by the next issue in 2 weeks will be removed off the list and off the respective road projects as well. If you have any questions, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Mediation on Lexington, Kentucky
I will be the mediator on the issue of the deletion of certain pictures from the Lexington, Kentucky page. I need to first know if you feel that this is still a current issue (i.e. if the anonymous user continues to delete this photo). If so, I will contact the known user who has been involved with the unnecessary deletion and the anonymous IP address. Alexander Phipps 12:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
About your request for a coach...
Your name is still listed at Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Requests. Note that the instructions may have changed since the last time you checked, and the department now follows a self-help process. See the instructions on Wikipedia:Admin coaching. If you are no longer in need of a coach, please remove yourself from the requests list. Thank you. The Transhumanist 04:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I reviewed you. YechielMan 05:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Plese reconsider your vote to merge Human rights in pre-Saddam Iraq
Hi Seicer,
I've just put a lot of work into improving Human rights in pre-Saddam Iraq so that the article is not now anything like what it was when you voted to merge. I think it may meet your objections to it, so please take another look and see what you think. I'm still not satisfied with the article, but it has roughly the proper scope and many more reliable sources. I think what I've done shows that there's too much material out there to merge this article with anything else. Significant gaps remain and some subjects should have footnotes from more sources, but I think the article is several steps toward what it should be. Best, Noroton 22:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I really don't know... I still think having this large list is a bad idea. --NE2 16:44, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 4
 The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 4 | 24 March 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:28, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
question on your view regarding wp:rs
Hi Seicer, recently you revised an article with the edit summary "forums are not reliable sources" and provided a link to WP:RS. Although, on balance, I do not disagree with your revision, I thought I'd follow up for the sake of clarification. I am assuming you did not mean "under no circumstance is a discussion forum to be considered a reliable source."
... since obviously some forums may be the subject matter of an article itself, or otherwise meet standards for editorial oversight, fact-checking and authorship, as enumerated in the relevant WP policies. Just a minor clarification. Cheers. dr.ef.tymac 15:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, your assumption is incorrect. It really has zero to do with the article content for Ninjalicious, and was simply a request for clarification of your edit summary, which talked about WP:RS.
- As I already stated, I do not disagree with your revision of the article. I didn't ask for justification of your revision, because I support it. I am familiar with every point you raised in your assumption, and merely added the cite knowing it was a sadly deficient substitute for having nothing at all. I am personally familiar with the facts in this instance, so the addition was done in good faith, however I also know that my personal knowledge is not adequate substantiation for WP either. Your actions where therefore (in my opinion) appropriate.
- Like I said, my request was merely regarding a minor clarification about the policy page.
- Also, it helps if replies and discussion threads can be kept in one place for the sake of continuity, if you don't object. Thanks. dr.ef.tymac 15:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Image:Halturnerrally.jpg
Do you have a problem if I delist your IFD? I speedied this under WP:CSD#I3 as there was no actual fair use rationale on the image page and it appears in no articles.--Isotope23 18:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- You listed it under the correct place for an image for deletion discussion, I just happened to notice it when I was going though the uploader's contributions and I speedied it... then I saw the IFD. Generally speaking, if you find an image that is licensed for fair use (or unlicensed) and does not appear in any articles, you can tag it for a speedy deletion under I3 (I don't know the tag markup off the top of my head, but I'm sure it is linked somewhere on WP:CSD. I just didn't want to delete your IFD without talking to you first in case you went looking for it at some point in the next couple of days and it was suddenly gone.--Isotope23 18:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Lexington Center
I work at the Lexington Center, specifically, the Lexington Opera House. The Opera House IS part of Lexington Center. Please leave this inclusion in the Lexington Center wiki page. For more information, visit www.lexingtoncenter.com or www.rupparena.com.
-Tom Habermann, Event and Operations Manager, Lexington Opera House
- Thanks for contacting me. When did this occur? I found documents and papers at the downtown library and found no evidence to support that, however, it must have occurred sometime afterwards. I'll reinstate it. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 19:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
The Opera House was constructed in 1886 - and managed by various entities throughout its lifetime. The LCC relationship started immediately, in 1974, when the Opera House was supposed to be torn down. W.T. Young, Linda and George Carey, among others, started the "Opera House Fund" (OHF), a non-profit group that was started to save the building AND support arts programming. Since Rupp Arena and the Lexington Center were being constructed at that time, the OHF agreed to finance the reconstruction project if LCC would manage it as a part of its entertainment complex. Two weeks after this agreement was made, the roof to the OH collapsed, which tripled the cost of the project. Luckily, the OHF stood by their commitment, and funded the renovation. The building re-opened in May of 1976 and has been running ever since, under the management of the Lexington Center.
Over the last 30 years, the Opera House Fund has supported all local arts programming within the building. The OHF underwrites the Broadway Live series, a series that has also run continually since 1976 (one of the longest continually-running series of its kind in the nation - AND in one of the smallest venues that presents national touring Broadway shows).
If you'd like to discuss, I'm more easily accessed through my work email: thabermann@lexingtoncenter.com.
---Tom Habermann
Mousetrap car
Thanks for getting the vandalism there, I was still looking for a decent version to revert to but you were quicker than me. Good job! :-) Myanw 14:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Bubba the Love Sponge
you changed a posting in the bubba the love sponge site section. The official fan site is bubba thelovesponge.net you can go there and hear bubba's voice and brent the shows producer stating that. so why did you remove the entry ? we have been fighting vandalism on that page for a long time. sternfannetwork has defaced the article multiple times. sternfannetwork is associated with howard stern and does not belong in the bubba the love sponge article. we are tired of always cleaning up the mess that others leave behind. please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.213.251.31 (talk • contribs)
- Per WP:EL, your fan site is external link is considered spam. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 18:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Block of Serafin
Hi, you just left me a message informing that Serafin was most recently blocked indefinitely by Yamla. I knew that. What was the point you were trying to make?
--Richard 16:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Serafin is still being quite virulent on his own user talk pages, lately on user talk:Otwieracz where he has attacked both you and me, his remarks disturb me to think that someone cna be like this.
--Jadger 08:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 5
 The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 5 | 5-8 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 00:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Wild Law (book)
I note on your personal website that you are in favour of animal rights. You would find the book Wild Law very pertinent. Given that you are interested in the subject, you might be pleased to see that so very many respected scholars and thinkers (three of whom are notable enough to have Wikipedia articles written about them, including a Nobel Peace Laureate) have written about the book; that there have been several major conferences based on the actual book itself (with speakers who are members of the British parliament, professors and heads of legal departments at universities, and other distinguished and renowned individuals); and that the book has received non-trivial mention in several legal publications and national newspapers. --Lesley Fairbairn 09:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Cave Clan site
Hi Seicer,
Just a quickie to say thanks for your work on the Cave Clan entry; I was hoping for a wikipedia person to step in and take control of the site instead of having it described wrongly and in you came!
So yeah... and keep up the good work!
Cheers from Oz, Dmnscar 09:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC) P.S. Bluegrass is great, I love the music of Gillian Welch
April is just a bad month
Sorry if I was gruff or rude with you before. You see it was on this week a few years ago that my 8yr old son died in my arms from cystic fibrosis. And just one year ago my best friend of over 20yrs died during the first week of April from a heart attack. This is just a bad time for me. Do whatever you want with the articles. They don't really matter. Nowonline 18:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 6
 The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | |||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 6 | 21 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | |||||||||
| |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:15, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Auditor
I see that you voted on the AfD of Robert Arbuthnot (auditor). I just thought I would tell you that I have now put together an article on the Auditor of the Exchequer in Scotland. Regards. David Lauder 15:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 7
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 6 | 21 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | |||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —VshBot (t • c) 19:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Kentucky Transportation Cabinet
thanks for catching that, I was formatting the page with the new maintenance tag and I didn't notice lol. Xjared 03:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- No, but I have a friend who does (he supplied me with the pictures)...and I know a few of the engineer's that work at the district 10 office. Xjared 03:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- definitely, I've been wanting to plan a trip over that way for some time now. The Kentucky 15 page is looking a lot better now...much better than what I started with haha. I was hoping to get a few pictures along the route to put on there, along with a semi description of the whole road. (maybe you could re-write my description once I get it on there?) Xjared 03:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 8
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 8 | 19 May 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —VshBot (t • c) 19:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Kentucky Route 15
Hi, I just finished adding a list of major junctions to the KY 15 article. I was wondering if you could take a look at it and make sure that everything checks out ok? Xjared 01:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
William Goebel
Thanks for the Goebel resource. I'll try to look into it over the long weekend. Been on a business trip and largely wiki-less for four days now. Also, thanks for the support of my FA nom. I was getting really bummed over having done so much work only to be told that it was "poorly written" and "a mess." Acdixon 02:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
ResolvedSeicer,
Fairly new wiki and open to input. My edits have all been factual, truthful accounts of the city, events, history, etc... Can you explain, for example, while there is a section on Race Relations on Cincinnati's page but not, for example, Pittsburgh's? Just doesn't make sense. That suggests that Cincinnati has race problems but Pittsburgh doesn't, which would be an absurd statement.
Looking forward to helping wiki improve through factual, truthful information and sources...by the way, I do I add sources w/o simply adding a link?
Also, the web Cincinnati page, as I found it, held many politically motivated comments and spins. Why would that be?
Thank you and, again, I look forward to helping wiki provide a real view of many items! Brian P. Storn (—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Maxbps (talk • contribs).)
- Seicer,
Thanks for the info on how to include sources.
RE: Cincinnati - Race Relations...While it is true Cincinnati made national news some seven years ago, to call that event a riot or even worse riotS, is woefully inaccurate. Just because the media calls or called them riots does not mean they were. A riot involves major looting, burning down of structures, and extended lawlessness. None of which occurred in the Cincinnati incident. Any looting was minor at best, the incident took place in under an hour, and zero buildings were burned. How can even the most unobjective person call that a riot? (And, again, just because the media used that term does not make it accurate.)
And, furthermore, it was one event thus singular not plural.
These are the facts of the case. Again, my focus is to help Wiki get it right and be consistent from site to site.
RE: Cincinnati vs. Pittsburgh AND St. Louis...which does NOT have a race relations section despite its long history of racial tension, troubles, real riots, etc... So, again, I have to ask why would Cincinnati? Because Cincinnati's was more recent? Seven years ago? So when/what is the statute of limitations on an event that was widely but inaccurately oversensationalized?
Good luck with your job/papers/career! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxbps (talk • contribs)
I applied the proper warning templates to his user-page. It'll save you much time in writing :-) Cheers, Seicer (talk) (contribs) 02:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! I wasn't sure if he qualified for the factual one, and honestly the civility one slipped my mind when I gave my initial warning to him.--Rosicrucian 04:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Louisville brainstorming about enhancing communication and coordination
See this project talk topic. Your views are very much welcome! Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Pullman Sq.
I made a few copyedit changes and requested a couple of citations (they would be requested in a peer review). youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 12:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)