User talk:ErrantX/Archive/July 2006

Discussions archived during July 2006:

Recent additions

You wrote: "Some of your recent additions are a little thin on the ground and need expanding. You might want to do a little more research and beef them up before you post anymore new content --Tmorton166 23:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)"[reply]

Sure thing. To be honest, I wasn't sure if I was going to be called on it or not: my impression was that the content in the forms of stubs was appropriate in length with the knowledge that they would be eventually expanded upon and improved... I extend my apologies. Ben Tibbetts 00:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh no, it's perfectly alright. I must have missed putting stubs; I apologize. It may be that I didn't categorize properly also; I'm afraid I'm at a loss with that stuff. Thanks again and I'll try to be more careful in the future. Ben Tibbetts 23:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

??

WHy did you give me all that admin notice crap? DId I do something wrong? God, I'm sorry if I did something wrong, I didn't realize it, I'm still new! Please don't bite the newcomers. NumaLlama 21:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why???

WHy are you yelling at me again on my user page?! My God, I didn't mean to piss you off! I should've known better than to speak up! Living in a free country has made me slack, and I guess I was wrong to assume this place would allow for dissent. I can't believe you did this to me! Now my UserTalk page is cluttered with horrible, threatening notices, intent on silencing the masses! Fine; you win. As much as I love this username, it's too shamed in the talk page to go on using. But you haven't won completely! I'll make another name. I'll defy your little rules about multiple names and start fresh, with no warnings on my page! ANd this time, I'll keep quiet so I don't provoke any more abusive administrators. NumaLlama 16:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-marital sex vs. extra-marital sex

I have to confess that I do not have the context for this discussion. I cannot find the location in the article Criticism of the Catholic Church where this is discussed. Can you help me? Then, I can respond intelligently instead of guessing.

--Richard 23:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed

Thomas - Agreed and duly noted. Regards, Chris Csm 1701 18:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Just checked. You were right! You must be psychic! Csm 1701 19:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haved altered the beginning to this article. Now contains no gender references at all. The original intro is far better, however until that can be safely brought back, this is, I hope, acceptable. 83.217.190.69 09:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk: Liverpool FC’s 2005-06 Champions League Qualification

I appreciate your interest in thie article and I am grateful for any suggestions. Your NPOV correction is excessively heavy-handed, to me NPOV does not exclude irony and nothing is more ironic than choosing an also-ran over a champion. Your NPOV edit also misstated and obfuscated the issue. Thanks for your other comments.Franchecomté 17:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that you have such a strong belief in NPOV, but the statements that you deleted from my original article post, were completely factual statements. Irony often makes use of incongruous, but completely factual statements, as I did here. The notion that irony is a violation of NPOV and should be expelled from wikipedia is rather extreme. I see from your own excellent user page, that you do a lot of NPOV editing, perhaps you are overdoing it just a tad.Franchecomté 18:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CPs

I am happy with the wording. Thanks.Ros Power 20:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal

Hi there. Thanks for helping out by mediating a case in the Mediation Cabal. When closing a case, though, next time please archive it by adding it to the archives at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Closed Cases 3 . That template is a bit hard to see, I know, so maybe it should be added to the cases page instead of the main mediation cabal page... in fact I think I'll do that. Happy editing! Cowman109 ^Talk 19:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But we DID come to a conclusion, didn't we?

Hi Tmorton166. Thanks again for wading through all that stuff on my mediation case. I see DV8 2XL had to put his spin on it at the end. That's par for the course. We DID come to a conclusion, as I understand it. I lost! That's OK. My pursuing this with arbitration is not about the win or loss, it is about the civility issues regarding DV8's treatment of me and to some extent, you. Thanks again.--Ewrobbel 15:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medcab ?

Have you taken the jeryl-heath-midg case? I am asking to now whether I should move it to another column Geo.plrd 20:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Dawn Disputation

Dear fellow user Tmorton:

I’m just wondering if I’m in the right place to discuss the editing on the Golden Dawn article with you. I’ll look forward to working with you and discussing the compromises I have in mind; if this is indeed the correct place to contact you.

Frater FiatLux 01:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For helping me with mediation process. Cheers V. Joe 07:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civil Partnerships mediation

My attention has recently been brought to Civil partnerships and the problems that have taken place regarding the wording of the opening sentence. I skimmed through the mediation of a few weeks ago, and notice that the issue was subsequently sent to the Arbitration Committee. As there doesn't seem to be any mention on the article's talk page of a decision, I was wondering if there has been one at all, and if so, what the final word is. Thanks, roma rin [talk ] 16:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the info. I was under the impression that it had already gone to the Arb Com; I guess this is not the case. Thanks! roma rin [talk ] 22:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RobotG mediation request

Hello. I see that it is accepted that the mediation request about RobotG was completely erroneous. Do I need to do anything about it, or is the matter now closed? As you have seen, I did not act outside Wikipedia policy anywhere. By the way, let me commend the good work of the Mediation Cabal while I'm here! Regards, RobertG ♬ talk 09:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Deleted page

I understand where you are coming from, but we can not reinstate pages, Deletion Review can. We also can not hear Admin complaints. Geo. 20:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Poundland

I did some more copying for the Poundland article, but it still needs more, and then needs to be categorised like you did previously. I'll do some more copying when I can, but like you, I ran out of time :p --Killfest2 05:01, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2006 FIFA World Cup controversies

Hi Tmorton166! I hope you are having a great day. Just thought I'd pass by here due to your involvement in the AfD of the 2006 FIFA World Cup controversies article. Since the article has now been kept, I'd like to encourage you to help improve this article. Please feel free to pass by and help neutralise the article, or simply leave suggestions for improvements on the articles talk page. Kind regards, MyNam e IsNotBob 03:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, ErrantX/Archive/July 2006, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (Ben Tibbetts 03:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -SCEhard T 02:43, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archive -- Errant^talk(formerly tmorton166) 09:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CPs

Hello Thomas,

Your informer is simply incorrect about CPs. It is completely, factually inaccurate that CPs are only open to "same sex couples".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/06/nlaw06.xml

"As the distinguished family lawyer Stephen Cretney explains in his Clarendon Lectures, to be delivered in Oxford later this month and published by Oxford University Press, the new legislation does not require civil partners to be homosexual or indeed to have a sexual relationship of any kind. They do not even need to live together.

The benefits on offer under the Civil Partnership Act 2004 are available to pretty well any unrelated couple of the same sex aged 16 or over, provided neither of them is already married. All they need to do is to sign a document before a registrar in the presence of each other and of two witnesses."

case closed, archive -- Errant^talk(formerly tmorton166) 09:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (Rosicrucian Order of A+O)

I appreciate your work to end the revision nonsense that was happenning concerning modern Golden Dawn based groups in the discussion of the article The Golden Dawn Tradition. Unfortunately, User 999 is not respectinig the decision that you reached. He ia malisciously and repeatedly revising the page for the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (Rosicrucian Order of A+O), replacing it with content which is politically motivated and inaccurate. He is additionally and inappropraitely getting users blocked, Frater Fiat Lux, for example, who disagree with him.

Please intervene!!!!!!!! We need your assistance or this garbage will go on forever. We thought that you had worked this out!

case closed, archive -- Errant^talk(formerly tmorton166) 09:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Complete Peanuts annotations on hold

KXL: 9:40 pm 9 June 2006: Just in case, I contacted the publishers, Fantagraphics, and they said that they would consider hosting the annotations at their web site. NO PROMISES, but they're looking into it. This would remove the "wiki" aspect of it, but may be a solution. My take on the GFDL is that we would still be able to use the links into Wikipedia if used Wiki's boilerplate. Is that right? Please hold off on talking to the admins . . .for a while. Thanks for your efforts.

archive -- Errant^talk(formerly tmorton166) 09:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inza

Hi Tmorton166,

No, this is not Inza from Dr. Fate. This Inza appears in Cable, and is a mutant peruvian terrorist. Check this link:

http://ocean.accesswa.net/Comics/3040/Comic.aspx

See ya! Gonzakun

That's Ok man Gonzakun

archive -- Errant^talk(formerly tmorton166) 09:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

comments

I just want to say that your detail in the comments box, especially on the Practical Webdesign page, make handling new pages and recent edits very easy! Please keep up the good comments, i mean, thats what its there for.--Gephart 21:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

Although edits aren't meant to be the main factor, approximately how many edits did you have when you applied (successfully) for the Mediation Cabal? I just want to get a general idea, even though I know edits aren't everything - just a general outline as of which stage of your Wikicareer you applied. Daniel.Bryant (aka Killfest2) 01:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your VandalProof Application

Dear Tmorton166,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact with the new 1.2 version release it has even more power. As such we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that for security reasons, VandalProof's creator requires it's users to have made 250 edits to articles, which you have not. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again in the not too distant future. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof. - Glen 02:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, although technically you only have 185 mainspace edits^[1] I have looked through you contributions and will make an exception in your case (dont tell anyone! ;) Keep up the great work! Welcome follows:

Welcome to VandalProof!

Hi ErrantX/Archive/July 2006, thank you for your interest in VandalProof. I am happy to announce that you are now one of our authorized users, so if you haven't already simply download VandalProof from our main page, install and you're all set!

Warning to Vandals: This user is armed with VandalProof.

Please join the VandalProof user category by adding either: {{User:UBX/VandalProof}} (this also places the user box attached) or, [[Category:Wikipedians using VandalProof|{{PAGENAME}}]] to your user page.

If you have any problems please feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page. Welcome to our team! - Glen 02:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support (and congrats!)

		Thanks for contributing to my successful RfA!
		To the people who have supported my request: I appreciate the show of confidence in me and I hope I live up to your expectations! To the people who opposed the request: I'm certainly not ignoring the constructive criticism and advice you've offered. I thank you as well! ♥! ~Kylu (u\|t) 20:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to thank you for your support, and maybe a little bit of congrats for the VandalProof acceptance! It's pretty exceptional to get approved early! ~Kylu (u|t) 20:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amarillo Records

Hello, thank you for writing me. Information on Amarillo Records is scarce on the web, so citing references is not an easy task. Most of the information I collected is from my record collection a few feet away. All artist articles that are cross-referenced in Wikipedia can verify having been on the Amarillo Records label. I can't provide any Amarillo-specific references other than information I included in the Gregg Turkington article links.

HL

Thanks for replying

Thanks for taking the time to give your opinion regarding my user page design. I have answered your concerns, and I would greatly appreciate it if you could come and evaluate the latest version. Killfest2 13:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup Taskforce

I added two articles, Video scaler and Jack Sparrow, to your desk. The first is a technical article the second is copyediting. You can accept both, one or none. Please take a look and either accept or let me know and I'll reassign any you don't want. Thank you. RJFJR 02:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For the good words. I really didn't feel I was going to be successful, but I couldn't pass just in case others disagreed with me. I do hope to try again in six months or so. Lambertman 12:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weird edit

Hey, I finally figured it out, and it was the weirdest thing. I went to the talk page of the message right above your message on my talk page. You had left a template on his talk page. When I clicked on edit to add a new message, the template you left on his page redirected me to your page (?????). In order to leave a message on his page, I had to edit his entire talk page, rather than just editing the section. It's a mystery to me !! Sandy 21:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is - check it out. When I was trying to add the message right after yours, and clicking on the edit for your message, it redirects to your page?? [2] Sandy

I'm glad that mystery is solved: I thought I was Lost in Space :-) Sandy 10:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bluebot

Hi thanks for the note, see my response there. Martin 21:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]