User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive71

Riya Sen GA review

The issues you raised in your previous review of Riya Sen has been addressed (appropriately, I hope), apart from the length of the article (but, the current length does meet the criteria). The article has been largely revamped, and forwarded again as a GAN. If possible, can you take another look? If you do have the time to review the article again and find it unsatisfactory (but not extremely so) then may be this you'd like to put it hold and give me a couple of days time to address whatever issues appear (I might even need a bit of counsel at that). Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 04:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi there Aditya, I do have a personal policy of not double reviewing articles. Since GA is down to own judge, I think it's better to bring in a new judge each time to get more variety of viewpoints. But while you are waiting for the review, I would think that you would have to have the lead at least 2-3 times longer. All the best, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

2008 New Year's Day Test

I thought i should inform someone that I've created a page for the 2008 New Year's Day Test match, i've got the structure all thought out in my head so please don't delete it even though i don't think there's is much precedent for its existence. I would appreciate some help because it appears you watched it. I'm going to make it neutral so don't worry about that, I'll mainly quote journalists and players and just state what happened. I know of some websites with Australian point of views so I'll use that as well. Thanks. Darrowen (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm yeah I did watch it. I think we might as well tag the things sepcifically as "Aus" and "India" and have a section for non-invovled people. The Indian media just don't have anything serious. Also the Australian media is very nationalistic and a bit blind sometimes, except for Fairfax. Esp the Newslimited folks say that McGrath has always succeeded when he targeted batsmen, even though Vaughan (02-03) and Strauss (05) scored 2 and 3 centuries each and averaged over 50. ~ 65 in the case of Vaughan and the newslimited folks are still harping on about his success against Warne. This was a big match so I wouldn't think about deleting it, along the same lines as Bodyline Tests, Tied Test, Laker's Test Eden Gardens 2001, 99 WC SF, RSA v AUS in 99WC super 6 and a few other things, not all because of controversy. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Point taken about Fairfax newspapers. How about ToI, you seem to be on good terms with them :P. Darrowen (talk) 03:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Preferably not, it's best to use only top quality sources, so I always avoid using Newsmedia tabloids, Rediff and ToI. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

And of course, Cricinfo is a reputable source isn't it? Darrowen (talk) 03:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah it is, Cricinfo also has a selection of pundits that tend to be more NPOV than the single-country newspapers as well. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Also I noticed this admirably simple account of the events [1]. Darrowen (talk) 06:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Blnguyen and welcome back for a little while. You may also wish to look at this as well - Bucknor-Benson dubious decisions. There has been some good news as well; Bagga is now FA and Deafy has been reviewed, if you have the chance to take a look. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 00:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Bingo, thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps this article about the Sydney Test should be nominated for the front page at WP:ITN/C. Especially with the talk of government intervention and so forth. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. Is it much chance of getting up? -- Mattinbgn\^talk 08:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps. It will need a bit more refs but that should be easy, I have nominated it. We could do with a few more opiners there. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Did I read you implying that ToI is not top quality? I thought that they called on the best monkeys in the business as pundits! Should I have mentioned monkeys? Oh well... JPD (talk) 11:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Note

Hey there Blnguyen, just a friendly reminder to upload the DYK image on wikipedia and let the cascading protection do its job. Todays one was vandalised on commons a couple of times before it was protected over there. Regards. Woody (talk) 12:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, how embarrassing. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Belated wishes

Hello Blnguyen, thanks a lot for your new year wishes. Wishing the same for you as well! About TOI, since you were the one who made them famous on wiki, its only fair that you start the category and include yourself :) — Lost^(talk) 19:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Templates

Do u know how I can convert, or do you know anyone who can convert, the empty scorecard at User:Darrowen/Sandbox1 into a template where people can enter the scores and names neatly. —Preceding comment was added at 03:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I experimented and it seemed to work. Just put in the stuff between the double ||, they separate the columns and so forth. And plug IND and AUS so that it draws flags. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Andrew Symonds.jpg

You uploaded Image:Andrew Symonds.jpg. Why does the image not match that in the source provided? Only noticed because of recent vandalism regarding Symonds. Gimmetrow 05:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

It appears that some anon put a fake source there whereas I had alredy put my source in teh upload summary. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Don Tallon GA

I was in the midst of finalising the paperwork when you left a message. Top job. I might now work on another on the Invincibles. --Roisterer (talk) 06:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

(ec) Congrats on Tallon, now a Good Article! I would like to put McCool up for consideration soon. If you have a second, would you mind having a look and providing some thoughts? Not a good day today so I thought I should stay away from the wiki. Probably a good move :-( -- Mattinbgn\^talk 06:34, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey there. In response to your question about which of the Invincibles I might tackle next; Ron Saggers looks as undeveloped as any. Of course, I now only have to dig out some information for him. --Roisterer (talk) 01:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Roebuck responses

Is it really NPOV to put one persons opinion down without including rebuttals? You seem very adamant that the rebuttal is simply a news corp/fairfax dispute but I didn't pick that up when I read it. I know there are lots of opinions on the page, but Roebuck's in particular has come under criticism in more than one place. If I used multiple sources would you not delete it? Ansell 06:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not sure. If it was a cricket pundit signing himself for cricket commentary it would be fine, but is this a cricket department piece or one of the editorial board doing it, since the page was unsigned. Normally, I would think that if a guy really said something a bit too colourful then maybe another cricketer would strike back first, like when Bedi or Gavaskar previously did on unrelated stuff... Did any cricket community people respond directly to Roebuck in a less commercially politically overt way? Anyway, just take it easy, you've reverted a whole pile of things in the last day on that article....So have I .... and some people have broken 3RR. I wouldn't bother complaining in this instance since there is all sorts of new info being added because it is a current event and I would just let everyone have open-slather editing in good-faith in these circumstances, as everyone is at the moment, but its better to not have some overzealous admin step in and hack a few people. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow... Looking back I did do at least three straight reverts across my edits in a 24 hour period. They were all on single reverts on different issues but that doesn't change it really. Wouldn't have helped to block anyone, especially seeing as they stopped once they realised they had to use an account to edit... (Although truth be told since I have switched back to the monobook style I may have been guilty of an anonymous edit in the middle myself without fully realising it at the time).

On the media wars thing, I wasn't intending in anyway to spam wikipedia unnecessarily but it looked like verbatim comments were being included without context or rebuttal which I see as necessary for an attempt at NPOV in heated situations. Interestingly, Roebuck published a sequel to his original feudal article that is a bit more rational [2], although he stands by his original statement which shows at least a little bit of neutrality from our ex-pat brit journalist. The cricinfo blogs directed me to this article by Mike Coward (Weekend Australian... I know I know... media wars maybe, but its rational and not an editorial or oblique opinion piece) [3]. It may be useful if someone wants to include a few comments following what has been one of the single most controversial and talked about journalist statements by Roebuck from what I have seen. Anyway. I might leave the article to cool down because as you say even though editing has declined in the last 24 hours it is still a hot topic and will contrinue to develop.

Oh no, I'm sorry if I sounded as though I felt you were spamming; it was Newslimited that I felt was coatracking and using a cricket controversy to get some media wars in there and taking the opportunity to land a few hits on Roebuck. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

No offence taken, just trying to sort the situation out. Ansell 07:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

What do you think about turfing most of the article out to Bollyline? Seeing as how the name has caught on and the article isn't just about the test anymore I would think it is a better place for the deeper issues. Ansell 10:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think we might have to fork eventually anyway (72k already), since now that there is a lot of interest it looks as though there will be a good deal on the racism issue by itself, the wider politics by itself, and the cricket oriented stuff - just the match and the umpiring decisions. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Sometime when the article settles down to a fixed length it might be a good time to bring it up again. I saw it referred to as monkeygate in an article today... Ansell 07:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Second Test

It has become a bit of a mess with multiple revert wars and without much article improvement. I share your concerns about IP and new accounts. Is it worth semi (or even fully) protecting the article until everyone cools down. I think I am too involved to protect it myself but another admin probably should. Your thoughts? -- Mattinbgn\^talk 07:33, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I wouldn't do it myself and it's probably good that you don't either for the sake of our own heads. I could also CU them but I don't think I should do that either....that's why I just put up the caps banner telling them not to cheat. The other thing is that the Wikipedia protection policy recommends against locking pages that are on the front page, as this one is, so that the wider public and casual user doesn't get upset about the ethos of "everybody can edit" - It will get knocked about a bit but this is way less than the battering that Assassination of Benazir Bhutto copped. The other thing is that I suspect that socking aside, a few people, including the two opposite IPs, Darrowen and a few other guys have gone over 3 reverts, and a lot of established users have gone up to three. Since it's still a current event with new info, a lot of people would be switching things more than they usually would. I wouldn't think that blocking people would be a good idea though - there isn't any bad temperedness going on and even though there have been a few reverts everyone is still doing things optimistically; although some of the IP and newbie edits are not of the greatest quality and a bit off-centre in terms of POV, I think most of them are good-faith new users, so it's probably best to let them get into editing, rather than cutting them off. Some of them might become long-term users so I would just let them go about their business for a while, since the article isn't going to die down anyway. They're all editing in good faith at the moment, as long as they don't start socking.... Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I am a bit naive I guess. I spend most of my time on Wiki editing articles on small towns and dead cricketers. They don't tend to see this level of editing ever! No, I am not for blocking or CUing anyone either, although I have given some friendly warnings to some new accounts and IPs. I didn't know that about articles on the main page, thanks for that. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 08:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/PONDHEEPANKAR

FYI, adding User:Nadarsagham to the list for checking. ^Avruchtalk 16:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks for keeping an eye out. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

E-mail

Sent. Acalamari 21:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Bingo. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Renaming Buddha (general) again

As you may remember, there was a vote and move last fall, and afterwards we had a discussion of alternative names, in which we gathered many more facts. Larry and I feel it is time to vote again. Both Larry and I now favor "Buddhahood", which seemed to be your favorite, too, but we feel it would be better to alert all people who participated in the discussion. All options are gathered in Talk:Buddha (general)#Table of options — Sebastian 05:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Double Seven Day scuffle

The article Double Seven Day scuffle you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Double Seven Day scuffle for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Rudget. 16:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou for your attention. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the Barnstar

Thank you very much for the barnstar; I appreciate it. Thanks again. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 23:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the DYK

Thanks for the DYK on the Oberhof bobsleigh, luge, and skeleton track article. I really appreciate it. Chris (talk) 00:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!

Dear Blnguyen, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget. 16:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

sockpuppet

Hey so Palace is Sumple’s sock? It seems like he is still refusing to acknowledge that fact on AN/I. Does this constitute as trolling? The fact that he is trying to sound like a neutral editor genuinely concerned about the integrity of my userpage while hiding the fact that we had an ugly history. He also seems to be hiding his block log and history of abuse. Is blocking the right course of action?--Certified.Gangsta (talk) 07:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Well it's too old to do a checkuser but he hasn't even bothered hiding it. The userpage of PG08 has a link to his personal webpage, which leads here. Click on "main page" and it leads to here where it says he is Sumple. This is also consistent with his deleted userpage for Sumple. They all had the same external links to the Chinese Law Students society etc, etc and the same type of info. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. His relationship to admin User:enochlau is also highly questionable. Now that he has come out of his shell and start crusading against people he hold grudges against in his previous account, I think he has violated the terms of right of vanish and therefore has become an abusive sock and troll that should be blocked.--Certified.Gangsta (talk) 08:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 3	14 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: A new weekly feature
Special: 2007 in Review	Wikimania 2009 bidding ends, jury named
Controversial non-administrator rollback process added	Supposed advance draft of Jobs keynote surfaces on talk page
WikiWorld comic: "The Nocebo Effect"	News and notes: Fundraiser ends, $500,000 donation, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Fundamentals of editing
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Wicca/Paganism in Australia

You keep deleting my 'Wicca/Paganism in Australia' paragraph and I wish to know why. I've checked my facts, I've added citations & I'm not breaking any rules. So why is it being deleted? The page itself isn't being deleted, just the paragraph and the link in the 'Religion in Australia'. I sincerely hope that you aren't doing this as a result of your ignorance towards the religion. Wicca & Paganism is one of many Australian religions and it has a right to be here just like Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism etc. So please, put your personal feelings against the religion aside and don't delete it again.

LilMizPiper

I removed your standalone section because of WP:UNDUE - Wicca is not a "major minority religion" in Australia, unliked, eg, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism. I see that it has been reinserted in teh small religions parts, which is fine. It's not about my personal religious preferences. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

DYK update

Howdy Blnguyen! I notice that you were active atm. The DYK is in need of a new updated. I moved some over but I hesitate to add one with a picture because I know something "special" needs to be done with the pic nom. I also wasn't sure how many nom were needed to balance it with the rest of the mainpage. Thanks! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 02:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you were coming in just as I was on the way out...:( Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh no problem. Andrew was able to take care of it. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 05:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

thx

I have the mop but can you search the RFA meeting shown to find the bucket?	<font=3> Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 60/0/0 yesterday! I want to thank Mrs.EasterBunny and Royalbroil for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. To paraphrase a president ... I wish my mum and dad could see the comments made. My dad would be so proud to see the comments ... and my mum would have believed them". I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and you may be surprised to find that I have not deleted all of the pages by accident..... yet). Thanks again, Victuallers (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)	An early RFA meeting to decide if Victuallers can be included as a sysop - use cursor to identify.

Front Page

The image in question

I reverted a reference to a current event happaning in Australia where an indian cricket called an aboriginal australian cricket a monkey (a reference to sub human) the photo could be very insulting to some people and is generally not in good taste. --AresAndEnyo (talk) 17:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, people have been calling me "YellowMonkey" for ages - June 2007 at least. Also pictures like Image:Blnguyen.JPG since May 2006 and Image:Blnguyen greengold.jpg have been there since late 2006. I would point out to you that the Australian uniform is actually mine and that Andrew Symonds is not an Australian aborigine. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

And I re-reverted. Just like Ryan did. Seriously, have we gone PC mad? The image has been there (in various forms) for years. Please leave it be! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd also add that it's there before the incident your quote took place - this is a simple online avator that Blnguyen uses, no need to cause problems when they don't exist. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

It's a pretty big coincidence that an indian cricket pundit would have a picture of an ape in an Australian jacket like the ones the cricketers wear at a time like this. A VERY BIG COINCIDENCE!! Anyhow the picture has implications now due to current events and should be removed as it is offensive and racist, at least through implication.--AresAndEnyo (talk) 02:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, I am not an Indian or a cricket pundit for ToI. The banner is a joke and has been there since early 2006, when the ToI plagiarised my cricket articles. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you read this? Please don't jump to conclusions. Blnguyen doesn't write for Times of India and his Blnguyen Ape has been on his page forever. - Shudde ^talk 02:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but given the monkey is closely affiliated with Blnguyen and has been since prior to the Australian tour of India (let alone the Indian tour of Australia), I find the insinutations that this isn't a "coincidence" to be mindboggling. Daniel (talk) 02:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

That picture has been there for a long long time. It has nothing to do with Symonds.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Well I guess the people have been spoken. I still think it's racist and that it is not a coincidence. Even if it is, it still represents something now. Taking into account people support for this image and the 3RR, I won't remove it again. Though I strongly erge Blnguyen to remove it.--AresAndEnyo (talk) 03:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I've already pointed out the circumstances for the picture were long before any of this happened. Also, are you expecting Hinduism to discontinue the use of a swastika because of Adolf Hitler? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Please state one phrase in WP:USER that justifies the removal of the image on Blnguyen's userpage. In the future, do not remove anything from another user's userpage without their consent, or unless it is blatantly in violation of a policy or guideline. If you personally find it offensive for one reason or another, just don't look at it. — DarkFalls ^talk 04:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I've met him IRL and he actually is a YellowMonkey. Very disconcerting stuff. Not racist, though. ~ Riana ⁂ 04:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I find this extremely amusing. Timeshift (talk) 04:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I find this extremely disconcerting. :) JKBrooks85 (talk) 10:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

MP

Do you do nothing else but tweak main page balance? ;P --Stephen 05:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Howzat! --Stephen 08:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Were you appealing just a minute ago for Tendulkar....hawkeye says....Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Graphs

The Herbie Collins one looks good and sits in the article very well. You have had a very productive afternoon! :-) Thanks, Mattinbgn\^talk 05:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Assessing

Hi there. You might as well assess them as you tag them....saves labour...Also, we probably have to work out whether Vietnamese descent people are in the project scope. My feeling is that if the person does Vietnamese-type stuff, like singing on Paris by Night or is an anti-communist activist then yes. I'm not so convinced about the likes of US born or people who left VN when they were children and became famous in the US for playing poker, etc. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Surely you are self-confident enough to tag articles less than 1k as a stub. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by YellowAssessmentMonkey (talk • contribs)

I'm a member of a few projects, and I know how to tag, but I never assessed anything. I'm not exactly sure how to evaluate them, then actually know the codes to assess. I just left it for others to do. Can you fill me in? Badagnani (talk) 04:15, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess I would need plain English to really understand this. You gave me a bunch of templates only. Badagnani (talk) 04:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, use {{WPVN|class=stub}} for a stub class article, use {{WPVN|class=GA}} for a GA-class article, use{{WPVN|class=A}} for an A-class article {{WPVN|class=FA}}, etc, etc, {{WPVN|class=start}} {{WPVN|class=B}} for a Start or a B-class article.. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Vietnam/Assessment#Quality_scale is the generic scale and examples to have a look at, for example. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, it's starting to make sense. My feeling is that stub cats and WikiProject tags are just tools to bring articles in a certain sphere to the attention of people who are interested and knowledgeable about those subjects. As someone interested in Vietnamese culture, I like to improve all the articles you mention (including poker players who left at an early age). You can be sure that most of those guys are listening to Paris by Night songs in their free time (even if they don't like hat cheo or cai luong), and eating gỏi cuốn. ;) Badagnani (talk) 04:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh maybe. I don't know of any Australian born Vietnamese kids where I live who listen to Nhu Quynh or Tran Thai Hoa.... except for me maybe...They don't even know who Nguyen Hue or Ngo Dinh Diem are either, mostly. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Introduction to evolution

Hi, Just wondered if your oppose still stands. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, okay I'll have a look soon. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

1996 Olympics

According to [4], Canada won the men's 4X100 m relay, not the U.S. A direct link doesn't work, so click "By team", "Men", "Gold", "America", "Canada", and "Atlanta 1996". On Wikipedia, this is confirmed near the end of 1996 Summer Olympics#Highlights, at Canada at the 1996 Summer Olympics, and at United States at the 1996 Summer Olympics. Art LaPella (talk) 23:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

That was a running relay. The Quietly Confident Quartet discusses medley swimming relays. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 23:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. Art LaPella (talk) 00:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Expatriate Vietnamese & WPVN

I couldn't agree more. DHN (talk) 03:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Editor Badagnani

You probably already know this, but this user has ZERO intention of working in good faith. He will edit war endless against Wiki policies. Probably needs to be blocked. Thanks, --Tom 19:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Mongo numbering

Identifying sock voting is very important, but you threw off the numbering for the votes at the Mongo RfA.[5] Doczilla (talk) 03:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Never mind. User:Ice Cold Beer fixed it. Doczilla (talk) 03:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Che Guevara Revision

Although I appreciate your contributions in the field of "Sock puppets" ... I would appreciate it if you would not vandalize the Che Guevara page. Declaring something "Communist Patter" (Whatever that means) is not sufficient enough of a reason to delete something. You are more than welcome to provide points or justifications for something if you believe it to be innaccurate and I can provide the evidence.

Redthoreau--TR 05:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not vandalising. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Execuse me

Excuse me! I redirect "Yen Bai mutiny" to "Yên Bái mutiny" just to support Vietnamese tone marks; you can easily figure it out and don't have to ask why. When you redirect the page that I create "Proclamation of Independence of the Democratic Republic of Việt Nam" to "Proclamation of Independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam", I didn't say a thing. But now I do same thing and you delete it. No fair! JacquesNguyen (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Belated Happy New Year

Hi, BInguyen. I just wanted to apologize for not responding earlier to your Happy New Year's note on my talk page, and to wish you a joyous year as well. I needed time off to recover my good faith in Wikipedia: I have, and I'm back, refreshed and restored. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 4	21 January 2008	About the Signpost

Special: 2007 in Review, Part II	New parser preprocessor to be introduced
Commons Picture of the Year contest in final round	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Freely-licensed music, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)