User talk:TheronJ/Archive/Archive2

Breast implant

Hi. Just wanted to let you know that I #My take on the Breast implant dispute|answered your question on my involvement in the breast implant dispute. Let me know if you have extra questions. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 21:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate the thoughtful response. TheronJ 21:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, actually the response was incomplete as I only pasted part of what I'd written! It's fixed now. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 22:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What to do when Admins defend slander?

Hi, I’m trying to call for Speedy Deletion of an attack page and am being slammed for doing so by people claiming to be admins. I bumped into your talk-page by accident, but as you have so many credentials listed perhaps you can inform me what proper procedure is, hopefully the page in question Benjamin M. Emanuel will already be deleted by the time you read this, if not please look at Talk:Benjamin M. Emanuel where I lay out my arguments that this is a slanderous attack citing only anti-Semitic blogs to call the father of US Rep. Rahm Emanuel a murderous terrorist involved in assassinating a Swedish official. Everyone claiming to be an admin acts like I’m crazy for saying it should be speedily deleted but no one will reply to the wiki-standards that I both cite and quote on the talk page. If, hopefully, this is resolved by the time you read this, what are the correct steps in fighting slander when opposed by admins? They just kept deleting my tags calling for speedy deletion and one insisted that the page remain for at least five days while a regular AfD discussion took place. Am I wrong in thinking that slander is suppose to be taken down asap? They also reverted any attempts by me to remove the slanderous blog material. What should I do if this is not resolved or if this occurs again in the future?--Wowaconia 03:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the quick response, the "living persons noticeboard" is the thing I was trying to remember. I knew there was something like this from working on other living persons' bios but had forgotten where I saw it. Not only did you remind me of the name but when you placed the tags in that Article's talk page I rembered that it was in those that I had seen it. In the future I will make it a practice of placing such tags in every living person bio I come across without one. Had I known this I would have just gone to the noticeboard after my request for speedy deletion was removed and let them handle it. That would have settled the matter efficently instead of the mess that's ongoing. Thanks again for your imput.--Wowaconia 20:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need a little help

Hi, I need a bit of help with a dispute. I have been attacked and harassed on an article talk page for proposing changes to the Save Indian Family article. The problem was listed at Wikiquette alerts for January 14th but has continued and is escalating. I am considering mediation and/or other other action was wondering if you could help me with this? --Cailil 18:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation for the Johann Hari Page

Hi TheronJ, would be delighted for you to mediate the Johann Hari dispute. Just one question, I strongly suspect that various sockpuppets and meatpuppets are operating on the talk page, do I need to do anything about this officially before mediation begins?Felix-felix 09:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have convincing evidence of sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry, you can put together a report at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets or Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. If not, my advice would be to save relevant evidence and diffs (off-line) and continue to act as if everyone you're dealing with is an actual editor. IMHO, there isn't really a big difference between 3 people disagreeing with you or 1, as long as they're raising the same arguments, so even if there are socks, they usually don't do the puppetmaster much good. Thanks, TheronJ 14:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. And as for ArbCom, I still think that last November I was too new to the project, but you know there'll be another election this year. :) Best regards, Newyorkbrad 20:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Favorably" is one way to put it . . . ;-) Congratulations, TheronJ 14:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring

Thanks for those suggestions - I incorporated them into the action plan - I think the concrete examples will really help! --Trödel 22:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trodel rfc

I appreciate your feedback, but I don't think you are aware of my standpoint, fully. Up until the ANI, I did use bad judgment, and bad manners, but after filing the ANI, I apologized, repeatedly, and I asked indeed for us to just walk away. My positon was not that Trodel was correcting my edits, but that there was no possible way he could have known there was an error, if he was not wikistalking me, by using my edit history as his own personal watchlist, and that's what i feel threatened by. If he would stop this activity, and not go out of his way to interact with me, I would do the same. Did you see the proposal I made on the talk page? I think that is a fair compromise in this situation, and it does not punish trodel in any way, but simply seperates us, which is all i really want. I don't believe trodel is willing to do that without arbitration however, which is why i was forced to filed this RfC. I thank you again for your feedback, and I appreciate it. TheGreenFaerae 22:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again

Hi again TheronJ, I'm really sorry to bug you but I may need some help or advice with a very hot dispute over in Talk:Men's Rights. I've notified the incident board and also got help from John Broughton of the Wikiequette alert project. I questioned the inclusion of unsourced edits (about same sex marriage first diff latest diff) to the article - these were deleted a few days later by an IP user (in England) but davidusher the editor who made the original post attacked me. This is the diff when he asks for my editting privelages to be revoked. In my view there are clear breaches of WP:COI, WP:RS and WP:NOR in the post. davidusher's response is in other users views a case WP:OWN and in my view uncivil and breaching WP:AGF and WP:NPA. I'm also worried about possible meat-puppetry in the future.
I'm contacting you to prepare for the worst. I may need an advocate to help me proceed. I've posted a concilliatory comment to the talk page after waiting for outside comments. I really hope this is the end of the problem, but if not I may need your help.--Cailil 18:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stress?

Actually I think this dispute could be pretty much solved if you could convince Jeff to be less snide and rude towards others. The problem is that his arguments of late simply boil down to saying the other person is incompetent or disruptive, or similar nastiness. I suppose this may sound biased since it's coming from the other party in the dispute, but it really isn't just about him and me; he exhibits the same pattern e.g. to JzG (here) and Hipocrite (here). >Radiant< 17:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to judge anybody at this point. (There isn't enough evidence to make an arb-com-style judgment, and I don't want to contribute to any accusations on either side at this point). My initial take would be that either you or Jeff could probably smooth things over by de-escalating and offering some tea. In my interactions with both of you, I've found you both to have bold, strong opinions, but to be willing to work with other editors. I'm not in a position to say who is at fault, but I'd love to see you guys patch things up. Thanks, and hoping for the best, TheronJ 20:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd love to as well, but my expectations are nil at this point. If he thinks I hold JzG to the same regard I hold him, he's totally got the wrong idea, which is the crux of this dispute. Thanks for your attempts, in any regard. --badlydrawnjeff talk 01:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, that's the point really. The fact that you don't like me is not an excuse for you to make personal attacks against me. If you'd just stop that I doubt we'd be having much of a dispute. >Radiant< 11:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't like or dislike you, actually. I just think you're disrupting the project. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Regardless of whether you're right (which you're not), that still does not justify you making personal attacks me. If you'd just stop that I doubt we'd be having much of a dispute. >Radiant< 12:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Wrong on three counts. I'm going to stop spamming Theron's talk page, now, I'm sure he didn't sign up for this. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I previously said I wouldn't judge anybody. However, I don't want to end up inadvertently implying that I approve or disapprove of anybody's conduct. So for what it's worth, here's my take:
1. The comments that I have seen from Jeff don't rise to the level of personal attacks. If Jeff thinks that specific edits are tendentious, that is at most wrong, but not a personal attack. However, the name-calling is not helpful to resolving your dispute. It won't help you two to reach a resolution, and it won't change one single editor's mind about who is right. I agree that Radiant!'s style is bold and aggressive, but calling him/her tendentious isn't going to do any good. If Jeff is really outraged by Radiant!'s editing, put together some diffs and propose a resolution. If that fails, consider an RFC if you must. It wouldn't hurt for Jeff to apologize to Radiant! for any offense given, or for you guys to just start over.
2. Radiant! does have a very bold style with regard to editing guidelines, but I've found that if I make an effort to speak his/her language, we are able to work together constructively. Also, I'm not judging or criticizing Radiant! in saying that I make an effort to speak his/her language; I'm sure he/she does the same for me. (Literally, in Radiant!'s case, but also figuratively).
3. Both of you have some postings where you accuse the other of lacking specific details and/or consensus. Either one of you is free to ask on the relevant pages to test where the consensus lies, and if you're confident that consensus supports you, revert.
4. Edited to add: The reason I asked about stress is that Jeff is normally extraordinarily good at working within Wikipedia norms to present his viewpoint, even under extreme pressure. IMHO, the accusations of tendentious editing and the like don't really do anything to advance Jeff's opinions and aren't likely too, even if they were unequivocally true. If Jeff's biggest concern is that Radiant! is editing the notability subguidelines against consensus, IMHO the best solution is to test for consensus, and to revert if appropriate. If there are some downstream issues with the effects of these changes on speedy deletion norms, then maybe some discussion on WP:SPEEDY is also appropriate.

Thanks for listening, TheronJ 17:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger at Orgs & Companies

Thanks for your well received change.

--Kevin Murray 21:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your mediation

Theronj-- thank you very much for all your help at Iraq War-- you were extremely effective, and it was very educational to watch you work. Your proposed text and then your seeking out Kirill for advice both seem to have been the turning points that got people together-- as of the time of this writing, it looks like Rangeley and Timeshifter have come to agreement (cross-fingers).

You know, the irony is that I myself never had strong feeling about the Iraq War itself-- I just got involved by trying to help settle the issue between the parties when the LAST RFC was filed back in Decemeber. Unlike you, I wasn't even remotely effective. lol. So, thank you very much for your help. :) --Alecmconroy 09:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks for going to Kirill. The fact that he recognized that its a campaign, but that its not the sort of campaign suited for "partof" was key for me, as noone else who had argued prior recognized this. ~Rangeley (talk) 16:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Talk:FrontPageMag.com#I_strongly_object_to_this_deletion up for deletion. Travb (talk) 03:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Morton is a Poo Poo Head

I laughed my ass off with this, you are my new hero. Thanks for making my day. MortonDevonshire Yo · 20:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MedCab cases

Hi, please close any of your cases that are done. --Ideogram 21:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder -- I anticipate closing one of the two this week, but the other is going to take some more work. TheronJ 15:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

It has been proposed that the following criteria be removed from this guideline: 1. The commercial organization is listed on ranking indices of important companies produced by well-known and independent publications.3 2. The commercial organization's share price is used to calculate one or more of the major managed stock market indices.4 Note this is not the same as simply being listed on a stock market. Nor is it the same as being included in an index that comprises the entire market. The broader or the more specialized the index, the less notability it establishes for the company.

We are close to evaluating consensus, please join with us in the discussion. --Kevin Murray 04:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MedCab case

Hi, can Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-04 Template:Animal Crossing series be closed? --Ideogram 10:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Johann Hari

Hi there. No desperate rush, but did you ever get a chance to look at the Hari page? David r from meth productions 21:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Johann Hari

Hi Theronj - are you still up for proposing a compromise on this one? You mentioned back in January you'd post something in a few days but we haven't heard from you since... Hope you're okay! David r from meth productions 14:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge & Truth

I am still expanding the article. Can you kindly suggest if anything else can be done to avoid deletion.Khokhar976 13:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taschner

Would you please revert your edit to John C. Taschner for the reasons I stated on Talk:John C. Taschner? James S. 13:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Riel on John Taschner

Would you please tell me why you believe that Riel might not be a reliable source on Taschner's award from the US Navy? James S. 23:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(discussion moved to Talk:John C. Taschner#Gordon Riel on John Taschner) James S. 06:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please expose the version of John C. Taschner you deleted on my talk page or e.g. John C. Taschner/alt so that RFC respondents might be able to compare the two? Thank you. James S. 20:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi James - the old version is still in the page history. You can see my change by checking this diff,[1], or the old version of the page without the diff at this link.[2]. I'll try to write up an RFC tonight. Thanks, TheronJ 21:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Sorry, I wasn't clear. I am asking that the RFC be between the current version and the version JzG deleted on 15 February. Thank you for your patience -- this stub has been through a lot in just a little time. James S. 23:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- I'm not an admin, so I can't restore the deleted version, but JzG probably would be happy to. TheronJ 03:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before the RFC

I have asked the question you suggested on the Attribution talk page.

Before bothering other contributors with an RFC, would you please phone Gordon Riel at +1.301.261.7735 to find out whether he will in fact verify his message? Thank you. James S. 23:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I won't call him -- I suspect it's true, but whether it's true isn't relevant. I'm happy to assume it's probably true for the purposes of the RFC if it will help. TheronJ 03:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I would like someone other than me to actually call him, to prove that the message is verifiable by a third party. Assuming it's true is okay, but not as good. Also, he's likely to tell a third party some more information about the award. I'll ask on WP:VP tomorrow morning. James S. 06:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not asking you to call to find out whether Riel's message is true, but whether you can verify that he said it. As the formeost skeptic at the moment, you are the perfect person to do this. Could you please call him? If you still refuse, would you please let me know why? James S. 18:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, James, but I prefer not to. If it helps: (1) I believe that Riel actually wrote the message and that he believes it to be true; and (2) If you tell me that you have called Riel, I will believe you. Alternately, if Riel can point us to a published source about the award (maybe a newletter or press release from the organization that gave the award?) that would clearly be a sufficiently reliable source. TheronJ 19:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just got off the phone with Riel and I also spoke with the reference librarian at NSWCCD, and we are trying to track Taschner down. Riel saw him at his local chapter meeting of the Health Physics Society a month or two ago, but his hps.org address bounces. Without the month and year of the award, we can't get the copy of its documentation from the NSWCCD newsletter. I'll work some more on it. James S. 19:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I called the HPS and the email address they gave me did indeed bounce, but I was able to leave a voicemail at the phone number they have. I'll wait for a return call. James S. 19:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A newsletter from the awarding agency will probably be fine, and will give us some valuable detail on what the award was. Thanks for working on this! TheronJ 21:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Johann Hari RfC

TheronJ, Just had a look at the RfC intro, which seems ok-I made a couple of minor edits, and stopped there when I realised I probably wasn't supposed to do that....It might also be worth mentioning that the demonstration at Drax was small (<600 people) and that Hari didn't deny that the picture was him, he denied being at 'a peace camp' (which is how I mistakenly labelled the picture originally) and denied owning clothes like those. Ta.FelixFelix ^talk 15:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's up to you. I think the main description should be something all three of us can agree on, so if Dave doesn't have a problem with your edits (or mine), we're good. In addition, you and Dave can say whatever you want in the "Comments by involved editors" section. Thanks, TheronJ 16:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice needed

I replied to you on Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal#Success conditions and mediation strategies, and it seems that you'd be the right person to give me some advice there. Please let me know what you think. Thanks! — Sebastian 18:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I responded there. It looks like you have a tricky problem. The short form of my advice is too keep being civil, even (and especially) if the other side doesn't deserve it, keep working dispute resolution, and to stay firm but still explore compromises on the important stuff and not worry about the not important stuff. It looks like you're already doing a good job -- you just have a tricky knot to untie. Good luck, and let me know if I can help. TheronJ 22:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimate X-Men (story arcs): Peer Review

Greetings! In October of 2006, you participated in the discussion for the first deletion nomination of Ultimate X-Men (story arcs). The article underwent a second deletion nomination, which was followed by two months of rewriting, reorganizing, and referencing. It is now undergoing a WikiProject Comics peer review. Your editorial opinion would be most welcome to help us improve the article to A-class status. Thanks for your time! - fmmarianicolon | Talk 07:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editor review

I reviewed you. YechielMan 17:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CEM

Community enforceable mediation has gone into experimental rollout. Thanks for volunteering as a mediator trainee. We'll be in touch as this develops. Durova^Charge! 04:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CEM case opens

Commodore Sloat and Armon have begun mediation. For training purposes we'll be discussing the case by e-mail. I have a gmail account where we can chat as needed (if you have gmail too). Should you wish to comment directly to the participants, community input is welcome at this page. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 09:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come on over to the Johann hari discussion if you get a minute...

I really need help on a possible next step! it's been three months and Felix has not accepted any compromises on anything... Should I go for arbitration? David r from meth productions 18:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We are not making much progress, that is true. Let me ask for some advice tonight. TheronJ 00:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIV - May 2008

The May 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveCrossinBot (talk) 08:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BBones1996.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:BBones1996.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BLoodyBonesUK2001.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:BLoodyBonesUK2001.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BloodyBonesHungarian.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BloodyBonesHungarian.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BloodyBonesRussian2002.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BloodyBonesRussian2002.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BloodyBonesUSPB2001.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BloodyBonesUSPB2001.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BlueMoonUK2001.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BlueMoonUK2001.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BlueMoonUS1998.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BlueMoonUS1998.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BlueMoonUS2001.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BlueMoonUS2001.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sarah_McClendon_and_Bill_Clinton.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Sarah_McClendon_and_Bill_Clinton.jpg, 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. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 02:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sarah McClendon and Bill Clinton.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Sarah McClendon and Bill Clinton.jpg, 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. BJBot (talk) 00:14, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Twila Tanner

An article that you have been involved in editing, Twila Tanner, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twila Tanner (2nd nomination). Thank you. Eastmain (talk) 01:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Hornbook -- a new WP:Law task force for the J.D. curriculum

Hi TheronJ/Archive/Archive2,

I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in United States legal articles to take a look at WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".

Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.

Each casebook will have a subpage.

Over the course of a semester, each subpage will shift its focus to track the unfolding curriculum(s) for classes using that casebook around the country.
It will also feature an extensive, hyperlinked "index" or "outline" to that casebook, pointing to pages, headers, or {{anchors}} in Wikipedia (example).
Individual law schools can freely adapt our casebook outlines to the idiosyncratic curriculum devised by each individual professor.

I'm encouraging law students around the country to create local chapters of the club I'm starting at my own law school, "Student WP:Hornbook Editors". Using WP:Hornbook as our headquarters, we're hoping to create a study group so inclusive that nobody will dare not join.

What you can do now:

1. Add WP:Hornbook to your watchlist, {{User Hornbook}} to your userpage, and ~~~~ to Wikipedia:Hornbook/participants.

2. If you're a law student,

Email http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Hornbook to your classmates, and tell them to do the same.
Contact me directly via talk page or email about coordinating a chapter of "Student WP:Hornbook Editors" at your own school.

(You don't have to start the club, or even be involved in it; just help direct me to someone who might.)

3. Introduce yourself to me. Law editors on Wikipedia are a scarce commodity. Do knock on my talk page if there's an article you'd like help on.

Regards, Andrew Gradman ^talk/_WP:Hornbook 05:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Election Need Your Feedback

I noticed you were a regular editor on the 2008 election page. Myself and other editors are odds on some edits we are trying to make to the page. Since you have already been involved in probably similar discussion, we would greatly appreciate hearing your feedback on the 2012 election discussion page under the Republicans and Ruled Out discussions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_presidential_election,_2012#Republicans.3F

David1982m (talk • contribs) 20:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Editor assistance list

Hello. Since your account has recently not been editing very regularly, on the page Wikipedia:Editor assistance/list you name has been moved to a list of editors who are willing to give assistance, but may not always be available. There is an explanation at Wikipedia talk:Editor assistance/list#Problem with inactive accounts on the list. You are, of course, welcome to move yourself back to the other list if you wish to. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Islamikaze listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Islamikaze. Since you had some involvement with the Islamikaze redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Have mörser, will travel (talk) 23:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above is a false alarm. I found the paragraph you wrote at suicide bomber, and which had been objected to and deleted in 2007, and I have merged it to Raphael Israeli, where I suppose it's less objectionable. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 21:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Merry Gentry

Category:Merry Gentry, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:59, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Survivor (Octavia Butler novel - 1st edition hardcover).gif)

Thanks for uploading File:Survivor (Octavia Butler novel - 1st edition hardcover).gif. 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 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Werieth (talk) 04:27, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]