User talk:Trebor/archive3

Re: Transclusion of signature

So I can't usee the \{{User:Averross/signature}}? I'm not objecting or bitching or making excuses or anything, but I just see it all the time. Is there substitution method? I do like my siggy. Also, I'm not sure what your second comment meant. --Averross 18:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC) :( -Okay, I figured out how to properly get the signature using preferences, now all I can't figure out is your second comment. --Averross (u♠t♠c) 18:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC) -Okay, I see now. Thanks a lot. --Averross (u♠t♠c) 13:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Ernest Emerson

Ernest Emerson Featured Article Review: It's been a week, I believe I addressed most if not all of your concerns. Let me know what else I need to do.

Thanks again for taking the time to review. Mike Searson 19:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I've addressed everything you requested, can you have another look if you get a minute? Thanks. --Mike Searson 14:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support! --Mike Searson 16:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

William Sledd

OK, it is time We Tubers had our own wiki. I am starting a wiki just on YouTube guys with more than 100 subscribers. I need ten good sysops. I've seen your contributions and that you realise there is a problem here on WP with too many mems being added in. We need to broaden the idea of wikis. I would like to invite you to participate. Please let me know by emailing me. frummer 08:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SkyTrain (Vancouver)/archive3

I believe your objections have been fixed. Can you take another look at it? Thanks. — Selmo ^(talk) 21:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

It's been a week and a bit since my recent request for adminship passed, and since I haven't managed to delete the Main Page - yet - I figure it's safe to send these out. Thanks a lot for participating in my RfA; I hope to do a good job. If you see me doing something wrong, need help, or just want to have a chat, please don't hesitate to drop by :) – riana_dzasta 13:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Good luck with your ongoing RfA! – riana_dzasta 13:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator! Useful Links: • Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide • • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR • Your admin logs: • blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

If you have questions, feel free to leave a talk page message for me or any other admin. Again, congratulations! Essjay (Talk) 01:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes indeed, congratulations to you and all your puppet friends . Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Heh, that was an interesting RfA for a while :) Congratulations, and all the best. – riana_dzasta 07:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Re:Vandalism

Awww...noobie admin!

Hehe, if no vandalism has occurred within 24 hours of being issued a final warning (t3 or t4), then I won't block. If the person has been blocked very recently, you can go directly to a t4 warning. If they vandalize, then you can block. For now, I won't unblock since I think the IP is not being shared, and should still remember being warned just two days prior for vandalism. Btw, congrats! Nishkid64 15:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Restaurants in the City of Thuringowa - the result was delete

just like to say thanks for doing what you did now you should go and look at the other 200+ pages that are the same as what mine was, i stated this page so i could link to it from the main page but i guess i was the unlucky one that got picked out this time Thuringowacityrep 23:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of User:Potus7

I've undeleted User:Potus7, as the page was made with the permission of the user. "Page created by another user" isn't a CSD, and neither is "possibly attack page." Next time, if you aren't sure as to a user page's purpose, please ask its creator or the user it's associated with instead of deleting it. JDoorjam JDiscourse 22:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February Newsletter

The February 2007 issue of the Films 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. Cbrown1023 talk 23:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 17:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Input is appreciated

Dear editor, per your suggestion in the closing statement of this recent AfD, I would appreciate your input here: Talk:List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck"#Arbitrary cut-off discussion. Best regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 09:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Jackie Barnes

You deleted his page but he has done extensive touring worldwide and recorded on over 15 albums? You said you deleted it because of a google search? Jackie has his own official website www.jackie-barnes.com and is mentioned on www.jimmybarnes.com and www.jimmybarnesonline.com if you do a google australia search you will find a lot more results under his name due to the release of his song "Same woman" on the Double Happiness record. Will you reconsider re loading his page? it has been there for quite a while now until you deleted it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thongchai4286 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

I will talk to the person who runs his website. He is still dealing with google in terms of getting the page searchable. I think it is to a degree for the moment. so far the forums seem to be coming up.

There are some factors that show he is eligable to have his page re loaded. He sung a duet on the Double Happiness album by Jimmy Barnes. That album debuted at number 1 on the Australian charts. The song from the album "same woman" has been on rotation in radio in australia as well as in many cd stores around Australia. He has toured internationally as a drummer with Jimmy Barnes. The band has toured UK, Europe, Asia, Australia and New Zealand. these have been reported in newspapers etc. He is currently recording the new Jimmy Barnes album, and has done some writing for the new Living Loud album with Steve Morse and Bob Daisley. His website shows the 20 albums he has appeared on as a soloist and drummer. In the children's group The Tin Lids, they were nominated for the ARIA award for Best Children's album, I believe it was 1992 or 93. There are plenty of recordings on his site available to listen to and youtube videos.

Surely there's enough there to merit his page being re loaded? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.136.22.4 (talk) 19:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

Imeem

Hi. I'm just checking whether you've requested oversight for the personal info you deleted from this page? If not, I'm happy to do it, but thought I'd better check first. Many thanks. Trebor 21:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess that may have beem more appropriate. No, i did not. I have not done much with oversight. I just know how to do admin revision deletion. Was that an innapropriate course of action? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 21:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for that —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thongchai4286 (talk • contribs) 22:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

Thank you

Thanks for semi-protecting The Wedge (Australian TV show) your support has been huge and appreciated. Shaggy9872004 10:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Good work at RFPP today :) I kept trying to get in there before you, but finally gave up. I think I managed to protect one, and got so excited that I forgot to tick it off on the page :) – riana_dzasta 12:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

• I just wanted to say thanks for participating in Wesley Clark's FAC, the article was just promoted! Staxringold _talk^contribs 14:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Levitron edits

There was actually three IPs in usage. You may want to block 202.83.43.249 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) as well. (→Netscott) 16:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the assistance. I would have sought blocking save for the fact that there were three IPs in usage. I'll follow your advice and head on over to WP:AIV if another IP pops up again. Cheers. (→Netscott) 17:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Unproctection

Thanks, how long to you think it will take it's only a simple warning I want to give RuleBrittania 18:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes I don't know the guy but he wasn't following AGF on what I saw, Please don't be patronising, I know I haven't been here long and am not part of the hierarchy but I'm sure I should have the same credit as others.. --RuleBrittania 19:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

JW's talk page

Only wanted to let you know that an anon forgot to sign this edit and you may have mistaken it as part of something I posted in reply. Gwen Gale 23:01, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

edits to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

Hello ! I see you have added a proposed text in the "Deathly Hallows" article [1], however this proposal was still being debated and was thus uncomplete.

It seems you have been misled by the words of User:Sandpiper, who has manipulated my previous sentences in order to make me say something that does not correspond to my actual opinion and which does not reflect any of the concerns I had raised.

I had expressed doubts at the beginning, but he didn't listen and directly proposed his text for integration. I then objected, and pointed out that it was still uncomplete and still needed to be worked on before being acceptable for the article. However, Sandpiper then started to argue that I "had not the right to express my opinion" after having already said something a week before. More over, he kept ignoring every concerns I had raised in my original statements, and he just wouldn't allow me to have an opinion now.

That he has spoken in my place, and that he has manipulated my words in order to make me sound like I agreed with him, while it was not the case, and that a proposed text was integrated in the article without consensus (while there was a debate going on), is just unfair. It's not normal that a contributor, who is not me, could talk in my place and pick up only the words he likes among my messages, and leave the rest aside, thus depriving me of my right to object. Folken de Fanel 00:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Here we go, for the record I am copying here the entire exchange from FdF where he commented on this version for the 'hallows' section before I waited, then posted it for inclusion:

Well, sounds good. I guess this issue didn't deserve so much time and energy wasted, after all...Just a little comprehensive effort from Sandpiper, and almost a week of fighting is over. Congrats'.

Just a little thing, your proposition is exhaustive as to relics hallows, it would also be interesting to cover some shrine hallows (anyone has an idea ? Stonehenge, maybe ?) Folken de Fanel 22:19, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I put this together, but as I pointed out above, I am certainly not an expert on the subject of hallows in legend. My paragraph about legends with hallows may be acceptable, but is it correct? It seemed to me that Lulurascal contributed considerably to this section, and we havn't heard her opinion yet. There is also the issue that we do not address the meaning of 'deathly', which I have seen people confusing with 'deadly'. Sandpiper 07:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, as far as speculations and "hallows in HP" are concerned, i have nothing against this version. This a preliminary version of course and others can share their knowledge of literary hallows, but it seems appropriate for a de-blocking of the article...Folken de Fanel 15:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

(Sandpiper 09:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC))

This wasn't my fight. The edit war was with two other editors. While I agree with them more than Folken,I'm not convinved that debating with someone who can't make up his mind is likely to produce a solution. Sandpiper 18:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Habbo Hotel

Thanks so much for the sprotect on the Habbo Hotel page. It was really needed, the level of vandalism was rising each day. Thanks again, --Spebi^[talk] 07:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hi, Trebor. Just getting through the thank you list for support at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated. Look forward to working with you around Wikipedia! By the way, how's it coming along for you being fairly newly mopped also? Bubba hotep 09:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ben Scowen

Hi, Trebor. We're having problems with recreation of the article Ben Scowen and I wondered if you could protect it. Thank you! BlackBear 22:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Worthadonkey

He's up to his old tricks again; recreated that Christina McHale article, etc. I suspect you shouldn't have unblocked him. --Orange Mike 15:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The Apprentice UK

Hello, Trebor/archive3 and thank you for your contributions on articles related to The Apprentice UK. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject The Apprentice UK, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of The Apprentice UK and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out and participate, please come over and visit us here for more information. Thanks! Dalejenkins 22:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Yep, that's cool, even if we disagree on the technical violation I was wrong to do it. Pls see the note I left you under your notice. Gwen Gale 20:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Meanwhile...

I think cooler heads are holding sway over at Essjay controversy. Could you unprotect it? Gwen Gale 21:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, even if I now think I asked too soon :/ Gwen Gale 22:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually in all of this I really only see one problem editor. I've counted something like five reverts by User:QuackGuru in the last 24 hours. I realize that blocking is not punative but I am inclined to file a 3RR report against him. If he were prevented from editing I believe that things would quite down and the article wouldn't need protecting. (→Netscott) 22:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Here are the reverts:

• rv1: 23:12, 9 March 2007

• rv2: 06:43, 10 March 2007

• rv3: 07:27, 10 March 2007

• rv4: 21:42, 10 March 2007

• rv5: 22:19, 10 March 2007

They're not all reverts of the same content save a few of them but WP:3RR says for all reverts. (→Netscott) 22:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Disruption, edit warring, careless reverts disguised as edits, misleading edit summaries, refusal to discuss after being asked to by the protecting admin... not to mention a borderline disruptive username and deprecated signature format. Gwen Gale 22:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

From my understanding, User:C.m.jones was also very involved with edit warring over the images (about which there is larger disagreement, even if not everyone is reverting). I think leaving it protected for a while would be best, while you attempt to hammer out things on the talk page. I will warn User talk:QuackGuru that further reverts without discussion (after protection is lifted) will result in a block (blocking him now would prevent communication over the issues, so I think it would be a mistake). Trebor 22:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

True, and User:HighInBC but I see three reverts each for both of them. Also User:C.m.jones was an editor at the center of the last article protection. (→Netscott) 23:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Keeping to three reverts avoids violating the letter of WP:3RR, but it is supposed to be an electric fence not an entitlement. I don't think the edit warring can be wholly pinned on any one editor, so keeping it fully protected until things cool down and people start discussing makes sense to me. Trebor 23:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

True, true. Still I see a large difference between 5 reverts and 3..... you might like to join the last discussion thread on Talk:Essjay controversy. (→Netscott) 23:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Truth be told, everyone was discussing things rather calmly until QuackGuru went on his revert mission back to a much earlier article state. Everything about this user is either borderline or flauntingly outside WP policy. Thanks for following things either way though :) Gwen Gale 23:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

While I did revert 3 times, it was to reflect the consensus on the talk page, I stopped there. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, noted :) Trebor 23:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment blanking?

This is a worry. Gwen Gale 17:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the software is glitching, as everyone seems to be doing it. See if it sorts itself out. Trebor 17:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Pretty sure it is, the same thing happened to me twice. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Revert warring

This is raw revert warring IMHO. Argh. Gwen Gale 17:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, probably not a good idea and I'm now involved. But the tagging is against consensus and, at times, downright silly (like the expert tag). Trebor 17:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Large pathetic galaxy

Sure! The reason I closed this as no consensus was that there were solid arguments to delete, good ones to merge and redirect, to just redirect, and to move to another title. "No consensus" doesn't necessarily mean anyone necessarily argued to keep, it simply means the participants in the discussion didn't come to a clear consensus on what should be done. Of course, merging/redirecting, moving, or just redirecting are editorial decisions and need no AFD, so if you want to keep discussing it on the article's talk until a conclusion's reached, please do! (The other thing I do advise people to remember is that AFD is a discussion, not a vote, so "I think it should be deleted but I'd be alright with redirection" is a perfectly acceptable position, and can help to prevent no-consensus trainwrecks.) Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck"

This page needs protection, or something. Every day someone comes along and want to change the numbers. It's a really hard kind of vandalism to spot. I'm telling you because you commented on its talk page. - Peregrine Fisher 09:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Please see my comment on Talk:List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck" before protecting the page. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 11:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Natural History of South Asia mailing list

This article is up for deletion can you kindly share your opinion on it [2] .

Thanks Atulsnischal 12:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello!

Congrats on becoming an admin! Oh, and you know how you said it would be interesting to see how an FAC on a minor television character would turn out? Well, now you can. :-) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 04:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

FYI

Your old user name is a double redirect. Cheers! - Anas ^talk? 15:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, it's now fixed. Trebor 16:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

AfD

Hi Trebor/archive3, this is a message I'm posting to everyone who participated in this AfD. I have nominated the same article for deletion again here – you might be interested. Regards, KissL 09:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

March WP:FILMS Newsletter

The March 2007 issue of the Films 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. This is an automated notice by Cbrown1023 talk 00:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Military history 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.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Shahbag/archive2

I have just put the article to peer review. Would you care to take a look? Aditya Kabir 20:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Chekhov

Thanks for removing that Broadway link. The things people are adding! Sheesh. Not a single decent edit yet today. The good-faith stuff is almost more depressing than the vandalism. qp10qp 19:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Veiled legal threats???

Question regarding potential block needed on a user, and the Wikipedia:No legal threats policy, at Wikipedia talk:No legal threats - subsection, Veiled legal threats ???. Please comment if you have a chance. Thank you for your time. Yours, Smee 01:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC).

Bart King

Greetings! You contibuted to a Peer Review of the article on John Barton King several weeks ago. The article is now up for Peer Review again, with the idea of pushing it toward Featured Article status in the future. If you'd like to have another go and give it a review, that would be much appreciated. Thanks.--Eva ^bd 14:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

April 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The April 2007 issue of the Films 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. This is an automated notice by BrownBot 22:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Trebor

Just curious to know if your chosen username is in any way influenced by or related to the 14th century composer? (who unfortunately still doesn't have an article!) Chubbles 05:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Fixed that one. Chubbles 06:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Nah, I had no idea the composer existed. Just a reversal of my real name. Nice job on the article though. Trebor 06:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)

The April 2007 issue of the Military history 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.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting Landmark Education art

Thanks Trebor. The article was just getting silly. Jeffrire 03:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Dang, that was a fast block. Like Brya's last sock puppet, there wasn't a question, though. Thanks for taking care of it. KP Botany 19:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Trebor 19:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

NWA Champiosnhip Wrestling from Virginia

Wikipedia is ridiculous. I bust my ass to follow all the ridiculous rules and my article NWA Virginia still gets deleted. This site is worthless. JeffCapo 03:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

It was deleted because it fails Wikipedia's verifiability policy. There need to be some independent reliable sources writing about it, so that the information can be verified. None were produced during the AfD. If you disagree with my closure, take it to deletion review. Trebor 08:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Is there any other info I can provide to get the article back up? Thanks. JeffCapo 17:33, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

What was asked for in the original AfD. Independent reliable sources which establish notability. Trebor 17:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, what would be considered a reliable source. Obviously a pro wrestling RS is obviously diffent from a "regular" RS. An example or two would be very helpful. JeffCapo 17:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't know much about pro-wrestling so couldn't say. Trebor 18:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Amazing. JeffCapo 18:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Ebilshroom

My friend Ebilshroom was banned but hes not sure why. He screwed up a few pages, but was stopped by Phaedriel. He did no more wrong, but was supposedly banned by you. Can you help me out? Mools 22:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

He did this, which suggested he might carry on. I've unblocked for now to see what happens. Trebor 23:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

I am TreborR on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/Trebor. Thanks. --Trebor 23:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:101 Dalmations II.JPG

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:101 Dalmations II.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 01:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Schalliol

Hi, Trebor, I'd like to request you undelete the Schalliol page. Here are the reasons:

• It clearly meets notability requirements, with at least five books documented discussing the important role of the family in French history to the present day and linkages to significant places and works of literature. In this case, the surname is what unites the events, people and places.
• The article brought into line with the comments of the admin who initally flagged it, Húsönd. A discussion was ongoing with him to improve the article before discussion was halted.
• You note you agree with BTLizard, who states: "It's just a name. I've got one; you've got one. Nothing special here." BTLizard was commenting on an early version of a page that seemed to be more vanity than anything else, with no significant detail. His comment is no longer appropriate, given the changes to the page made in reference to Húsönd's comments.
  • Additionally, there are numerous established surname pages with similar content, such as Keats and others. In fact, Schalliol has more detailed and historically significant information than that contained in those pages.
• Even thought most people commented on the early, less detailed version of the entry, there were more keeps than deletes. While I understand admins ultimately determine when to close discussion, there were clearly comments supporting both approaches, and the process was leading towards sustaining this newly substantial article.

I look forward to your response. PS I was going to add this to the deletion review page, as is suggested at the end of the deletion discussion, but I saw the deletion review page suggests individuals contact the admin first. Thanks, again. AoS XseedX 15:55, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I felt the article did not meet notability requirements: although there were five books, they were all authored by the same person (a Schalliol), and published by Belle publications (a possibly vanity press, who focus on printing genealogy books); there was no evidence of any wider notability. Many of the people supporting keeping had been involved in creating or editing the article, which suggested they would not be neutral, and contributed towards my decision. Of course, you are very welcome to take it to deletion review. Thanks. Trebor 16:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Trebor. It sounds like your primary concern is the breadth of sources for determining notability. If I were to provide you with a broad range of citations (not published by Belle or written by a Schalliol) documenting the family's history and consequential significance, would that satisfy you? I hadn't gotten around to posting those yet, but I'd be happy to do so now. Oh, and I know it's only a minor point, but one of the books wasn't written by Willis Schalliol or published by Belle. The cited, English version of that book was, however, published by Belle. Thanks again. AoS XseedX 17:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, if you did that I'd reopen and relist the AfD to get further consensus on it. Trebor 17:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Trebor, I've been really busy, but here are a couple of citations and information about Belle's book placement. I'll add some more citations as I have time. Given that it's a holiday weekend, that may not be for a bit. I've stepped out of indenting here because of the length of the post:

• Theurot, Jacky. "Racines." Revue du Parc National du Queyras, 1987.

-Contains considerable study of Christophe Chaillot and the family, in general, to better explore the "traditions, to conjure up the history of the country, to project into the future the richness of an inheritance that the Queyrassins reconverted for this remembrance." Here, Challiots are used as the quintessential example of Huguenots and especially their relationship with the Edict of Nantes. Chaillots are described as "a noble and prominent family of the Dauphiné," and Christophe himself is described as "master of the town" and then later "Adviser to the Parliament of Dole by letters patent by Margaret of Austria, dowager Dutchess of Savoy & Countess of Burgundy" and still later "counsellor of Margaret of Austria."

• Tivollier, J. & Isnel, P. "Le Queyras (Hautes-Alps)." Gap, H-A: Louis Jean, Imprimeur-Editeur, 1938.

-Contains significant discussion of François de Chaillol as significant actor in the role of the Queyras Valley, as described in the entry, in part.

You indicate concern about the quality of the publisher Belle and its authors, so I provide the information below to allay your concerns:

Here is some information which The English translation (by Erka Gautschi) of the Eugen Bellon "Scattered to All the Winds" book cited in the entry. The text contains dozens of pages on the Challiols and Challiots. Unfortunately, I don't have the book on hand at present, but you can verify this fact via the Amazon.com book page in the index. While this book is published by Belle, it is not merely a vanity publisher, as can be seen by the book's placement in at least 65 WorldCat cataloged libraries, including the following: Harvard University Divinity, Cambridge Univesity, Chicago Public, Purdue University, Abraham Lincoln Presidential, Kansas Public, Penn State, Dallas Public, etc. Which can be verified here.

As for Willis Schalliol's books about the family from Belle, they have been adopted by libraries as diverse as Indiana State, Public of Cincinnati, Los Angeles Public, Abraham Lincoln Presidential, Stephen F Austin State University, Denver Public, Sarasota County, Huntington Beach, the Library of Congress, and Alibris, among others.

Belle also published a book uncited in the entry until now in 2005:

• Schalliols around the world : a family history from 1283 to 2005 by Willis Schalliol; Paul Challiol; Françoise Tchobanian; Giovanna Challiol Rossi; Esteban Challiol

AoS XseedX 15:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, looks good. When you're ready, I'll restore the article and reopen the AfD to see what people think. Rather than my talk page, how about putting the sources on Talk:Schalliol, and dropping me a note when you're done (I'll then link to the talk page from the AfD)? There's no rush. Trebor 16:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Dominican Republic article

Hello, Trebor:

The past few days there has been what I would consider an edit war (or at least the beginning of if). An annonymous user has added (and tries to add more) of what several editors consider POV information. I've undone three times one section that has not been agreed upon on the talk page. This user has also accused of vandalism pretty much everyone who opposes his point of view. This user's type of vandalism (64.131.205.111) is kind of hard to spot, that's why I'm going with so many details here.

Is there a way that we can get some sort of moderator to check on this? Maybe semi-protect the page? Dominican 21:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, the talk page is a mess at the moment. I've blocked the editor who was insulting everyone. The IP editing doesn't appear to be simple vandalism (although I may be wrong). I can't semi-protect the page if it is a content dispute, as that would disadvantage the IP editor. In that case, you should try dispute resolution. Hope that helps. Trebor 22:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

My Rfa

Hello, Trebor. I just wanted to drop by to thank you for your kind support on my recent Rfa, it succeeded! I hope to live up to your expectations. Oh, and feel completely free to yell at me if I ever screw things up =) Have a great day! Yours truthfully, PeaceNT 07:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks once again :-) Later! PeaceNT 08:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Fixed links to logs

Hi Trebor, I took the liberty to fix the links to your blocking, deletion and protection logs on the top of this page -- they still linked to "Trebor Rowntree". Phaunt 10:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Oops, usurpation (is that the word?) sometimes seems more trouble than it's worth. Anyway thanks, much appreciated. Trebor 11:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:UnsignedIP

Regarding your recent protection of this template, it seems to be causing the "protected" message to show up on my talk page. Is that supposed to happen? It looks a bit intrusive. Regards, PC78 11:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC).

No, that was me making an utter hash of everything. Apologies. Trebor 11:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Alkivar

As an outside opinion what are your views on this situation? I attempted to get a topic on the administrators' noticeboard here, however it appears the topic became muddled halfway through with no real conclusions being drawn. –– Lid^(Talk) 12:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I would say that the removal of the information was justifiable (under WP:V, not WP:BLP), and that adding it back in unsourced is a bad idea. WP:V says that any material that is challenged needs sourcing, and the removal of the information is an implicit challenge to it. However, full protection is too strong a response (and doesn't allow users to readd sourced info), unless there's been a large scale edit war (even if there has, talking/warning the parties involved is usually a better idea) or it is a pressing BLP issue (which it isn't, because they're not living). So I'm somewhere in the middle: obviously the information should be sourced to somewhere before being added back in, but as they're not living, the intensity of the response can be less than if they were. Hope that made sense. Trebor 13:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Speedies

Wow, thank you very much, Trebor! I'll copy the script into my monobook. Everyone around seems to know a lot about script, while I am, like, ignorant :) Gotta learn more! It's really cool to know something new. Best wishes, PeaceNT 17:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Pabix

Hi. Could you explain your block of this user? [2] I can't see any vandalism from them, and so have unblocked awaiting your response. Trebor 12:03, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Caught doing bot-like reverts to vandalized revisions like this. Felt it was better safe than sorry at the speed he was reverting articles. I have no objections to the block overturn.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 23:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Another User:Brya sock -- a request

I would like to just post on your talk page and ask you to block these as I find them, as I intend to search for them. If you disagree with my doing this, please let me know. However, I would appreciate if you would help out with this, as it makes much less work for me.

User:Doerpfel User:Brya edits: [3] includes the italicization of higher taxa and stilting unreadable taxonomy jargon, [4] the italics, plus categorization (although the latter almost always done correctly by Brya).

Let me know.

KP Botany 03:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I have no problem with you posting them here. Doerpfel is blocked. Trebor 11:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. KP Botany 18:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

#wikipedia-en-admins

Hello. I've given you level 5 access in Wikipedia, as you requested on Wikipedia:IRC channels/wikipedia-en-admins. One 20:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Trebor 23:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. :) One 22:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

KP ODI graph

I would certainly be happy to, but it will have to wait until the end of this week I'm afraid. The university semester is into its last week and things have gotten more than a little crazy, but soon it will all be over and I'll be able to get back into editing here again. Thanks for asking by the way. I'm always happy to make graphs if asked. Raven4x4x 11:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

May 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The May 2007 issue of the Films 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. This has been an automated notice by BrownBot 22:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Carry On Dick.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Carry On Dick.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Pietersen

Hi,

In your mind, are you satisfied with the Kevin Pietersen article? It seems fairly stable at the moment - do you think it is ready for FAC? This will be the first article I've put a lot of work into that has reached this standard, so any assistance would be gratefully appreciated.

Is there any more major work you wanted to do?

Best, –MDCollins (talk) 15:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm satisfied, yeah. There's nothing major I want to do. I'll probably run through it once more to check the prose (as best I can), but feel free to nominate it. I think it's looking pretty good. Trebor 15:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, just remembered something. Could his career at Hampshire be expanded any further? I know he barely plays, but even words to that effect would be good. "Domestic career" seems a bit unfinished without it. Trebor 15:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I've expanded the Hampshire section as you suggest, explaining why he doesn't appear very often. I'll have a read through again later or tomorrow, and will nominate it then. Should we wait for the Test match graph to be updated? –MDCollins (talk) 16:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there's any need to. The graphs are often going to be a bit out-of-date; that's the result of trying to keep up-to-date stats on the page. I'm happy with it as it is. Trebor 16:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

FAC nomination - thanks for the work. Any help with the feedback will be good too.

Cheers, –MDCollins (talk) 22:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

It passed...Thanks once again for the work.–MDCollins (talk) 15:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, awesome. Well done :) Trebor 15:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Good fences.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Good fences.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Gone Are the Dayes.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Gone Are the Dayes.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:In a gadda da vida.JPG

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:In a gadda da vida.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Something to read:

Take a look at this. I'm not sure if he's trying to start a new list or not. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 10:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

It's not a new list yet, so nothing to be done. Trebor 13:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:The Cocktail Cowboy.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:The Cocktail Cowboy.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)

The May 2007 issue of the Military history 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.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 16:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Burntsauce

I'm sure you will be aware of the user Burntsauce, s/he has a habit of stubbing articles, then reverting any attempt to undo the stubbing and then the article gets slapped with a lock by either Alkivar or Myleslong.

Looking in the Yokozuna article history [5] I noticed that you unblocked this page after Alkivar locked it following an "edit war" (which was all of four edits), that page and Rico Constantino are both currently blocked and I was wondering if you could unlock them so I could begin to add sources.

Thank you for your time. Darrenhusted 18:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Tndqandbond.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Tndqandbond.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Featured article review for Austin Nichols

Since you have previously voted for the featured article Austin Nichols, maybe you are interested in the current featured article review. – Ilse@ 23:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

June 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The June 2007 issue of the Films 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. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. --Nehrams2020 09:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)

The June 2007 issue of the Military history 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.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:In a gadda da vida.JPG

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:In a gadda da vida.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Goldeneye comic cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Goldeneye comic cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Regarding User_talk:ProtoCat#Blocked, do a check user. ProtoCat is not VP. You're shutting down what might have been a good contributor (ProtoCat) just like what happened when OM accused VacuousPoet of being a sock of KDBuffalo. You should unblock ProtoCat, apologize, and suggest a mentoring program.

John Mayer

Out of sincere curiosity (not trying to be smart), did you read the entire article?--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 00:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Haha. I skimmed the rest of the article, didn't read it in depth. I just didn't like the lead. It might be fine though, and it's just me being weird. I dunno. Trebor 00:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The July 2007 issue of the Films 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. This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 20:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

"Google test"

I've reworked the page Wikipedia:Search engine test and note you discussed its standing 6 months ago now.

Do you want to review its correct standing now, again? FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 02:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Photo editing

Why is Photo editing still protected? There's a clear consensus on the talk page about what needs to be done. Dicklyon 04:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Can you unprotect it now please? The guy who asked for it to be protected, Alucard, now says he is no longer interested in trying to help, since one holdout has now posted his disapproval of what we thought was a consensus. Of course, if edit warring resumes as a result and you feel it should be protected again, you can do that. Dicklyon 17:03, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kyriakos 11:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Wandalstouring 12:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

August 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The August 2007 issue of the Films 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.
This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 13:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)

The August 2007 issue of the Military history 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 10:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Carry On Dick.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Carry On Dick.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call

Hey fellow Wikipedian! Your username is listed on the WikiProject Films participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:FILM editor, please add your name to the Active Members list. You may also wish to add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. We also have several task forces that you may be interested in joining as well.

Also, elections for Project Coordinators are currently in sign-up phase. If you would be interested in running, or would like to ask questions of the candidates, please take a look. You can see more information on the positions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators. Thanks and happy editing!

An automatic notification by BrownBot 01:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Nevertheless (band)

I notice that you previously deleted the band's article. Please restore the best version of the article to my second sandbox User:Royalbroil/Sandbox2 (if any versions are usable). The artist has become notable with several nationally known hits on Contemporary Christian music radio. I'm sure they have charted. I will not bring the article into mainspace until notability is asserted. Royalbroil 01:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. Trebor 09:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring it. How does something like that get speedy deleted, when it has a cited reference showing it charted on a national chart, a national tour, and two albums released on a major record label? Unbelievable. I know that you did not delete this version yourself, so my comment is not directed towards you. Royalbroil 12:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

How much editing/citing do you want to "prove" that the band is notable before I restore it to mainspace? I have added your talk page to my watchlist, so please reply here to keep everything together. Royalbroil 13:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm pretty busy at the moment and haven't got time to look into this. If you restore it, I won't delete it. Trebor 20:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my negative tone in the prior posts. I find it frustrating since there have been several Christian pop music artists with major hits have been speedy deleted. It defeats the purpose of WikiProject Contemporary Christian Music. Royalbroil 02:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Block request

I've never made a block request before, so please forgive me if I don't know the ropes. Over the past year, a person named Rebecca Urian periodically vandalizes the Cillian Murphy page by replacing the subject's wife's name with her own. If you check the history, you'll see that she's done it with different user names and without logging in. Today she resurfaced as Rurebecca92 -- it's a new user name and her only "contribution" was to again write herself in as Murphy's wife. Can she be blocked? Thanks, Melty girl 19:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

For simple vandalism, the easiest way to get a block is to report the vandal to WP:AIV. If they are a general vandal, you will have to go through the warning templates before reporting them. However, since this is a returning vandal under a different username, report them straight to the noticeboard with a sentence explaining that. In this case, I've blocked the account for you. Hope that helps. Trebor 20:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! --Melty girl 20:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2007 Newsletter

The September 2007 issue of the Films 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.

Please note that special delivery options have been reset and ignored for this issue due to the revamp of the membership list (outlined in further detail in the newsletter). If you would like to change your delivery settings for future issues, please follow the above link. I apologize for the inconvenience. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 00:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the Military history 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 10:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

FAC

Do you have any further comments and is possible to see if you can support based on what you said here? igordebraga ≠ 13:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Landmark Education

Has been fully protected for over five months - seems like an awful long time! What are your thoughts on dropping that down? Glen 08:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, been very busy lately. Feel free to remove it; I haven't kept track of what is going on there. Trebor 23:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Carry On Dick.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Carry On Dick.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the Military history 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 02:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)

The December 2007 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR

...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "S"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "T"s through "Z"s (and beyond, apparently)! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++Lar: t/c 20:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Woody (talk) 10:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Dpt bang bang.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dpt bang bang.ogg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Emmett Tinley1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Emmett Tinley1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 2008 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Libertine tattoo.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Libertine tattoo.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Esrever ^(klaT) 04:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 2008 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Baby Boy (song)

Hi Trebor. Thanks for the input and I've addressed them, I believe. Can you take a look at it now? --Efe (talk) 09:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello there. The user who remained opposing this article is very hard to please. I already asked a couple of copy editors and it seemed it failed to meet his standard or how he gauge a "brilliant prose". I consider your comments very nice and would you mind copy editing the article instead? Like removing redudancies? Thank you very much. --Efe (talk) 09:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

redundancy

Thanks, you're quite right. I've added a note to the solution, and when I overhaul the page, I'll probably integrate the removal of that second word and relocate the exercise out of the "remove one word" section. TONY (talk) 04:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/PowerBook 100

Replies to your comments at the FAC. Should all be fixed now. Thanks! — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 07:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

FAC

Good reviewing at FAC; hope to see you there a lot! TONY (talk) 10:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm hoping to be around a bit more for a bit. Trebor (talk) 10:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

help with RfC formatting

I think i have cocked it up. Could you tell me what I am doing wrong here? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)