Delldot on a public computer

This account is a legitimate sockpuppet of User:delldot. I'll only use it for editing from insecure computers, in order to protect my password.

Please leave any messages for me at User talk:delldot; you're much more likely to get a quick response from me there (unless you look at my contributions and see that I'm editing with this account at the moment; then the orange box might get my attention quicker). Delldot on a public computer (talk) 07:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh wow. Very erm creative name there Delldot! ;) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 09:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

from Zureks

Yes, it was me ;-) I am much more active on pl-wiki, but every now and then will scribble something here and there... See you around. Zureks (talk) 09:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hope so!  :-) delldot on a public computer talk 09:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

He he he!

No kidding! He's gots somes mad skillziz! Burningclean _[speak] 22:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I know, right? If I had skillziz like that, college would have taken me several fewer years :P I can only console myself by vandalizing his user page. Hope he understands and all :P delldot on a public computer talk 23:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

We must be vandals to prove ourselves! Burningclean _[speak] 23:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, looks like it's the only option left open to us. Oh well! delldot on a public computer talk 00:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The only outcome is a vandal warning! It was well worth it... Burningclean _[speak] 01:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Just remember, if we vandalize slowly enough, we can game the system by making them knock the vandal warning levels back down! Wanna tag team? delldot on a public computer talk 01:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC) (This is probably unnecessary, but in case it's not blindingly clear to anyone, I'm joking.)

My watchlist sucks and so do you guys :P dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 12:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Psssh! You're just jealous of our userpage vandalism skillz. Admit it. delldot talk 13:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Toothpaste! I think... Burningclean _[speak] 22:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Article on hold

I thought the article was really good, and was currently being worked on by a school project, so I thought it would be an occasion for them to improve the article. I think they may no longer be active, and since they were the ones who I thought would improve it, the improvements my not happen. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, too bad. I kind of wish I hadn't spent all that time reviewing it then, I wouldn't have if I'd known it wasn't going to get followed up on. Oh well, thanks for the quick reply. Peace, delldot on a public computer talk 01:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe they'll come by...I hope so anyway.Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Possibly, but I'm going to fail the article for now since there's no one currently taking responsibility for it (it can be re-nominated later if they come back). I recommend for the future only nominating articles if you plan to follow up on them and act on the suggestions of the reviewer. Anyway, keep up your good work, see you around I hope! Peace, delldot on a public computer talk 01:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Just in case...

Erm......ping? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

RE:Subcutaneous emphysema

Don't be daft, you handled it fine! :) Let's just get down to working hard on the article and finding these damn references! Regards, CycloneNimrod^Talk? 08:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Aww, you are so awesome Cyclone! Here I was thinking you'd be pissed and you are totally cool about it. As for the work, I'm right with you! Hey, I thought of another way to team up: you can look for review articles and point me to them, and I can actually access them! Also, I may be able to get to a medical library some time this summer (this one, actually), so if you hear of any books, let me know and I can look for them. delldot on a public computer talk 08:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a promising library, i'm sure you can get plenty of things there that might be useful. Have a look for subcutaneous emphysema if you'd be so kind ;) As for the review finding-and-accessing scenario, sounds good to me :P I'll be in touch if I think i've found anything good. Regards, CycloneNimrod^Talk? 08:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hrm, nothing on SE per se. I bet I'll have some luck with more general textbooks, though. As Colin said, there might be a chapter in one. But you wouldn't necessarily be able to know that by doing a search, which would only reveal the title of the book. Another way to find sources is to look through the references sections of articles you can access, lemme know if you come across any promising looking books that way.  :) delldot on a public computer talk 09:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Blackwater Worldwide

Hey there - sorry I didn't get a chance to reply to your review. Things have been ridiculously busy for me. Hopefully I'll get a chance to tackle some in the issues in the near future. Great detailed review though - although I've no vested interest in the article I wanted to thank you for the effort you put in there.

Regards SeanMack (talk) 05:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for hitting me back. Definitely give me a holler if you need any input or when you think you've addressed everything, I can let you know whether I think it's ready to go back up for GAN. No hurry, I definitely know what it is to have other stuff going on! Peace, delldot talk 05:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

:(

• hugs delldot-on-a-public-computer* -- Gurch (talk) 02:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Myasthenia gravis

Hi Delldot. I've found a lot of information about myasthenia gravis in pregnancy which isn't mentioned in the article. Problem is, I don't know where abouts to put it as it contains pathology information, treatment, epidemiology, prognosis etc. Should I just make a new section 'In pregnancy'? If so, where? Kind regards :) — CycloneNimrod^Talk? 19:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I think a new in pregnancy section is a good idea, and it should go toward the end, because that way you can discuss everything (treatment, etc.) without being repetitive--you can just point out how it differs from the general. I would fit it in as a subsection of Associations (depending on what they're talking about by 'associations'), or in a separate section between Epidemiology and Notable people. It can always be moved or reintegrated later if others disagree. I wouldn't be as in favor of having a sentence about pregnancy in each section (in pregnancy, it's diagnosed... in pregnancy it's treated...), but that's another possibility (e.g. that's what's done with trauma in the SAH article). delldot on a public computer talk 19:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Delldot on a public computer. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Delldot on a public computer. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Delldot on a public computer. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)