User talk:Nat/Archives 4

MFD Question

Nat, why did you speedily keep Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:68.39.174.238/Newgatery v.s. letting the MFD run it's length? — xaosflux ^Talk 17:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Much as I'd like to see the page kept, if you offer no reply in 12 hours I will put the page up on MfD again. Resurgent insurgent 13:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Riana already grilled me on IRC about it, so my response is if you wish to reopen it go ahead. nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 14:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Since you've replied, I won't. Thanks! Resurgent insurgent 21:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Brian Mulroney

Thank you for that Remembrance Day reminder. That reminds me, thank you for stopping us before we get started again. GoldDragon 01:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Remembrance Day

I really like your Remembrance Day reminder. I hope you don't mind if I put it on my own page. Cheers  _{Folic_Acid | talk}  01:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed the Remembrance Day reminder that you so kindly left on another user's talk page. I hope you don't mind if I "borrow" it for my page too. I'll be at the cenotaph on Sunday, reciting those words.... Risker 02:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I thank you as well. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 03:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Nat, that's so nice of you. You always go a mile ahead of everyone! OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd love to borrow that as well, if you don't mind! Tony Fox (arf!) 05:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks so much. Good on you for the reminders. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

On user talk pages

I noticed you have put the reminder on a lot of user talk pages. I haven't seen this sort of announcement of a holiday done before. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Now you do. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Remberance Day

Why are you spamming Remberance Day templates on people's talk pages? -- John Reaves

Because Remembrance Day is to honor the sacrifices of those in World War I and World War II. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 03:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The better question would be why you are complaining, since it doesn't seem he even left it on your page. Judging by the reaction on his talk page, people don't seem to mind - in fact they seem to appreciate the reminder. When the "slogan" is "Lest we forget", people tend to appreciate reminders and acknowledge them as necessary. Of course, that means I'm coming back to his talk page later tonight with my own graphic ;) Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 04:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I was just curious because I fail to see how it's relevant to Wikipedia. -- John Reaves 04:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I noticed the messages in my watchlist. Although armistice day is certainly a noble cause, it isn't clear that leaving numerous talk page messages about it is really appropriate. There are lots of similar causes that other users would care about equally. — Carl (CBM · talk) 04:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Please, do we really need to pick apart something exceedingly well-meaning just because it doesn't have to do with the encyclopedia? At the very least, it educated me (and maybe some others) about a US holiday that is shared with numerous other countries. I'd say it's at least done a little bit of good. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

This is a touchy area. It depends on how his target audience was chosen. If it's users he has worked with before, that's one thing. If it's indiscriminate, it would almost certainly be a spamming violation, which is discouraged for fairly obvious reasons. Aside from only vaguely being related to article editing, it could lead to proliferation. What if I were to post "Remember Pearl Harbor" on everyone's page a few weeks from now? That might not sit too well with our Japanese audience, as most of them would have had nothing to do with the Pearl Harbor attacks. Especially if I attach a photo of the Arizona billowing smoke, next to a photo of the mushroom clouds over Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

My goal was just to discuss the issue, which a lot of people have personal attachment to because of members of their family who served in the wars. As BB points out, it could be construed as spam. It also was not clear whether the edits were made by hand of via a script; I was hoping to find out through conversation. The long period during which the edits were made, with no other edits made at all, suggested automated editing. I would appreciate hearing from Nat about it, but I didn't think it warranted even a warning, just a note. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

They were all done by hand...never in my life will I use the AWB because firstly, I don't know how to use it, and secondly, I have no need for it...the point of these Remembrance Day notices is to remind people about the wars (doens't really matter which one or which side) and the people who fought in them, who live through them, and who suffered because of them....I am trying to be as ambiguous as possible with this notices, which means that anyone could see it differently...some people might see it as a reminder of how Canada "became" a nation in WWI, or of how many people died in Hiroshima or Nagasaki, or of the attack at Pearl Harbor, or of the Holocaust, or of the killings in Darfur, or of the Rwandan Genocide, or of the Nanking Massacre....its up to those who receive the message to define what it is a reminder of...I would say the about 90%+ of the people, I left these notices on, worked on some of the same articles or or same project, or even an arbcomm case that I have been involved with...I feel that I'm not pushing any POV, just a reminder, to remember those who lived and died in any wars or conflicts... nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 15:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Your dedication is impressive, spending hours and hours just substituting the same message by hand. I do think the message pretty neutral in terms of POV. It just seemed unusual to have a holiday announcement, Every day is a holiday somewhere... — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

re. In Remembrance...

How ironic...in Australia it was Melbourne Cup day today. We remember on Nov 11 - but thanks for the note :) — H₂O —  08:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

 — H₂O —  has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Ooops - just realised it's on 11 Nov everywhere - must have been an early note :P

Hey there

Thanks for protecting Allegations of Israeli Apartheid while tempers cooled. What can I do to help us to move forward? BYT 13:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I commend you to "Poppy Day", first track on Join Hands, by Siouxsie & the Banshees which uses some of those lines... LessHeard vanU 13:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Australian monarchy

Hello Nat, would you change Monarchy in Australia to Australian monarchy? I've messed up in my attempts. GoodDay 21:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Would you also 'delete' the article The Australian monarchy?, Somehow, I accidently created it. GoodDay 21:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Nat. GoodDay 21:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

???

What are we remembering? Corvus cornix 22:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused, since Armistice Day is November 11. Corvus cornix 22:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

OK. I'm not offended, just confused. But then, that's my normal state.  :) Corvus cornix 22:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's for you

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For taking the time to remind those you've known that we should never forget - lest we do the same mistakes again, in as apolitical a message as possible. Thanks!Ramdrake 22:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Remembrance Day notice

Thanks for the Remembrance Day notice. As a cadet in the Officers Training Corps (and I had a grandfather who fought in North Africa during WWII and an uncle who served in the RAF during the Falklands War), the sacrifices made by our soldiers (British and Canadian alike) to protect our freedom is something that means a lot to me. It's good to see someone making an effort to ensure that we all remember. Walton^One 22:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, thanks a lot, bud! John Smith's 23:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks from me, too.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. deleted contribs 01:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:Remembrance Day

Thank you for the Remembrance Day notice. Tony the Marine 00:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! JKBrooks85 01:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I spotted this and put it on my own user talk page. Thanks for designing that notice. Carcharoth 01:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much! C'est moi ^Parlez 01:46, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder Nat. My hat goes off to all of our friends up North and throughout the Commonwealth. Also, a very belated congratulations on your successful RfA. Had I not been in the middle of a very long downtime I would have voted for you. But I'm glad to see that your good work speaks for itself. -Loren 05:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks from me too! — *Hippi ippi 07:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

And thanks from that other big 'n' empty Commonwealth country:

       Ludendorff: The English [sic] soldiers fight like lions.
       Hoffmann: True. But don't we know that they are lions led by donkeys?

Lest we forget. Grant | Talk 08:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

well intentioned but no thanks

Please don't spam my userpage with reminders for holidays that you think are important. I appreciate that it is indeed an important event to be remembered, but there is no need to tell me that on my userpage since I have no relationship to the wikiprojects or people related to it, nor have I had previous contact with you. I can only assume that if you have sent me a message then you must have sent a LOT of people a message to the same effect. Can you imagine how full of event-span our userpages would be if everyone spammed each other for holidays, causes, events that they thought were especially important? That's what facebook is for :-P Thanks, Witty Lama 07:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The girl I love, she is a girl. But what the [...] would be our beloved world looking like if all the humankind consisted of girls!? Nevertheless I thank our God for she being a girl (not a boy, asexual being, plant, whatever):) Sorry, i'm mathematician a little:) Nat, lama, i don't know whether i would like your/nats remembrance if received it myself. I think i would like it:) I can easily understand Lama's feelings (though they are illogical a bit), and easily understand feelings of other people who say thanks. But the whole thing seems good. Somebody is disturbed, more are touched, but nobody offended to the extent making this bad. Just with any thing that touches too many people. I dont like many buildings in my city of Moscow, and many other things... If everybody did the same, anout every holiday... that surely would be bad:) When one man does this (even every RD) - it's seems good:) So I'm touched. It's strange thing - those remembrance days... As I see - it serves good feelings and purposes in Canada. Dont know why. I'm happy to know this! I'm not happy with the memory of WWII (we do not remember WWI since to many things happened since that time...) here in Russia. I wish the veterans to forget it... they couldnt. I wish my country to help them to forget and return to life. I wish myself to forget anything that bad. I wish patriotes stopped celebrate that war every time they feel... it's time to celebrate a war. I wish i didn play with some toys at the childhood, didnt saw many-many soviet movies with russian killing germans and vice versa. Didnt imagine myself doing this.

That's good when ppl remember people, not their death. Sometimes - even when the death. That is no good when we remeber war and victory (and when the memory slowly becomes the celebration). As well as no good when we remember _our_ sufferings instead of living happy lives. There are things to forget. I do remember englishmen, germans... other ppl who died somewhere in Belgium during the 1st worldwar. I did read Kipling poems on this as a child... i was touched. I remember other things that i dont want to mention. But i wish to forget many other things. Else my soul becomes ill.

sorry for such a long comment. I just glad to see thar you folks feeling such things by such way. May be... not all of you... not to all extent... but generally:)--83.237.24.149 22:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Winston Churchill

Why have you protected this? The additions by Wormwood66 do not call for article protection but for the blocking of the user for disruptive edits. Jooler 13:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Wormwood66 suggests a disruptive editor. Jooler 18:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

I had a granduncle die in WWI. His obituary is in the obituary article. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 17:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Looking for suggestion for dealing with vandals

Hi Nat, since I see that you are pretty active on WP I want to ask if I can ask you to block clear vandals when I notice them, or what is actually the best procedure to have vandal accounts and IP banned? Personally I think that we shouldn't allow anon IP to edit WP but since it's not up to me I am looking for an efficient way to deal with this problem. Thanks. -- AdrianTM 19:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I will do that. -- AdrianTM 21:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Remembrance Day

Everyone is thanking you for that, so I will do the same. As a proud Canadian soldier and a history major, it's very special to me to see that people, regardless of affiliation to the military, appreciate military history and support the Canadian military (an assumption I hope is accurate). Keep it up! Andrew⁶⁴⁷ 19:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Note

Can you give some context to the message you left on my talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar closed

The above arbitration case has closed. "For showing consistently poor judgment in performing administrative actions", Alkivar is desysopped. He may apply to the committee to have his adminship reinstated, but may not apply at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Burntsauce is banned as a meat-puppet of banned user JB196. For the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 01:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for the Remembrance Day tribute/reminder. Remembrance Day is a holiday all too often forgotten, and it's nice to see someone who cares. Cheers, Perfect Proposal ^{Speak out loud!} 01:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

So, how long am I supposed to do this for? Just asking. No offense or anything, I don't really know much about remembrance day... -Goodshoped 03:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe that in Canada, the poppy is usually worn for the two weeks prior to Remembrance Day itself, which is on 11 November. So, I'd think that to follow the spirit of the commemoration, you'd want to have the poppy up till 12 November. You can also see Remembrance Day for more info if you like. Cheers  _{Folic_Acid | talk}  04:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

yea, thanks for the message. Its great that you are doing this because remembrance day is ironically to often forgotten. -- (Cocoaguy ここがいい _contribs^talk) 22:04, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

OhanaUnited's RfA

Hello Nat, thanks for voting at my RfA. Unfortunately, the result stands at 51 support, 21 oppose and 7 neutral which means that I did not succeed. As many expressed their appreciation of my works in featured portals during my RfA, I will fill up the vacuum position of director in featured portal candidates to maintain the standards of featured contents in addition to my active role in Good articles. And don't worry, I'm still supporting Wikimania 2009. Have a great day. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Huge Request

I am extremely sorry to edit this page, but I was completely shocked to find all my information deleted. I was unaware of the rules and I apologize for it. The information I had saved on my user page is made by family and friends, it's our own countdown and it took us 4 years to get all that information, now it is all completely lost. If it's not too much to ask, it's ok if it gets deleted in the end, but I want to BEG for you to restore my user page just while I save all of my lost information on my personal computer, it means a lot to us and I really want to recover the data. We worked HARD on getting the page together! Once again, I apologize for the inconvenience and for editing this page, I just want to save all of my lost information.--Canuck01 23:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Please? All I want to do is save all the info I had up in my userpage, that's it.--Canuck01 00:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Canuck01 04:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• I HAVE ACTIONED THIS Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! ^(Whisper...) 17:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note - I had the exact same request posted on my User page - and I've sorted it for him - nothing to worry about and therefore nothing for you to do - just didn't want you trying to action something that'd already been done - have a good one. Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! ^(Whisper...) 16:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Signatures

Hey Nat, I hope it isn't a bother, but I was just curious as to how you get those fancy Wikipedia signatures. I've seen the box in my preferences, but I'm not quite sure what to put in there to actually change things such as the colour or font. Thanks for welcoming me and being so friendly! Illinois2011 | Talk 07:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Illinois2011 | Talk 00:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

In the nicest possible way

Please stop spamming peoples talk pages with lest we forget notices, people so not need reminding that its rememberance day (or be forced to be reminded). Yes, many soldiers gave their lives for what we have today, and everyone is eternally grateful for that. Although, yes it is a nice gesture, you have spammed several users talk pages with this, so please stop. Qst 19:14, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Please note, the above is not meant to sound nasty/rude, I just feel its inappropriate to go round several user talk pages of users who some of which you have had no previous interactions with, and spam them with lest we forget notice, although like I said — it is a nice gesture. Qst 19:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

Hi Nat. FYI, I replied at my talk page. Cheers. --G2bambino 22:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Erdos number DRV close

Hi, I'm not all that familiar with DRV, so this may be a silly question, but I see that you closed the Erdos number category DRV even though it's only been listed since November 7, and Wikipedia:Deletion review#Closing reviews says that pages should remain on deletion review for at least five days. Can you explain? Thanks.

And jfyi, I've elaborated my other concerns about this DRV on its talk page. Your reply would be welcomed. SparsityProblem 05:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Salut, Nat. I was happy to see you overturned the deletion of the Erdős number categories, a deletion that does not reflect at all consensus, in my humble opinion—and that of the vast majority of those editors who commented on this subject, on countless pages throughout WP. Now, unfortunately, I see you reversed your decision, for reasons of "canvassing", which I don't understand (who canvassed whom, where, and when?) At any rate, I appreciate the time you took to look at this matter, even if the outcome was not what I was hoping for, based on the overwhelming evidence that the categories are useful and that the decision to delete them was flawed, in that it did not reflect the consensus, especially that of editors who actually spend most of their time here at WP to add content to wikipedia, and may not be as well versed in the refined art of struggling in AFD/CFD/DRVs. Turgidson 14:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nat - you cited canvassing as your reason for reversing your original "deletion overturned" close. The part I don't understand is how come you only seemed to realise that there were concerns over canvassing after your made your first "deletion overturned" decision, when SparsityProblem raised the concerns in his complaint on Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 7. Was SparsityProblem's complaint alone enough to persuade you to reverse your original close ? The canvassing concerns were discussed right at the top of DRV discussion and had also been raised on WP:ANI. Didn't you take them into account when making your original close decision ? If not, why not ?? Some sort of explanation would be helpful for those like me who are rather confused by what you did. Gandalf61 09:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Nat, I'm a bit confused. Unfortunately, much (most?) of the material about my campaigning (the reason given for overturning ...yourself?) is at my talk page, so I can appreciate the context problem. But, am I right that you are the admin who closed the Deletion Review, in favor of overturning the deletion, and then overturned yourself? And your testimony is that you were not the subject of campaigning yourself, by anyone, correct? I'll watch this page. Thanks, Pete St.John 16:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA Questions

I answered your questions to my RfA here. --FastLizard4 (Talk•Links•Sign) 06:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Can you please close this AfD request

Hi Nat, can you please close Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2007_Romanian_Air_Force_IAR-330_SOCAT_crash I think people reached a consensus there. Thanks. -- AdrianTM 13:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

DRV

Hi,

I'm sure you meant well, but closing the Erdos number DRV early was not the best choice, especially since you had to reverse yourself. Five days is good minimum for a DRV, and only in the face of an overwhelming result should one close earlier. Best wishes, Xoloz 14:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Brian Mulroney protection

A request at for unprotection of Brian Mulroney has been posted at WP:RFPP. I think the article should be unprotected, since there was no major edit war in progress when you protected the article, and the level of vandalism was not so significant that it warranted semi-protection. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

I would appreciate if you told me what you found not quite right in my responses, if you don't mind telling me? It's possible we just don't see eye to eye on some aspects of wielding the mop, but your perspective might show me what you felt was important and I might, in fact, agree.  :-) — Coren ^(talk) 00:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks....

...for taking care of my username change. much appreciated!True theory 15:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for taking charge in that issue, it started to feel bad to be taunted on my page that it doesn't matter if I protest to racist remarks and that nobody cares... -- AdrianTM 06:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad this is over now. Thanks again. -- AdrianTM 14:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

List of recipients of tribute from China

Hello, can you take over about this disagreement. We have conflicting sources.

Thanks

China unprotection

If you don't mind, could you unprotect China? The dispute about names is more-or-less resolved, since the troublesome editor in question, Peter zhou (talk · contribs), is now indef blocked for being a sockpuppet of JackyAustine (talk · contribs). There's still some discussion going on, but I think it'll be handled in a much more appropriate way from now on. Thanks!  _{Folic_Acid | talk}  13:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Conservative leaders box

I changed it so that instead of first terms being bolded, second and successive terms are italicized. The bolding was really just visually jarring and unattractive, and the link to the current article is bolded anyways, which would be confusing in some situations (e.g. both instances of Arthur Meighen being bolded in its article). Plus, since multiple instances are the exception, not the rule, it makes more sense to emphasize them. Kelvinc 05:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Red copyright.svg

Quick note...

If you accidentally delete something and restore it, please check the log or the page itself, to see if it was protected before deletion. If it was protected before, do re-protect it. This is especially for {{pp-template}} high risk images like Image:Red copyright.svg. Thanks! Resurgent insurgent (as admin) 07:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Images of Wikipedians

I have reverted your recent edit to Wikipedia:Images of Wikipedians. "Speedy Keep per MfD" is not a valid reason to remove a DRV notice. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Mike R 00:38, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

As you apparently favour the keeping of this page, you may wish to comment in the second MfD here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Images of Wikipedians (2nd nomination). Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 01:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Qxz-ad-110.gif

Do you think you can make this image 468 by 60, as per the banner guidelines? And, the correct format Image:Qxz-adX.gif, where X is # of image. That's probably why the banner is not showing up. See this. Best. Miranda 10:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Ta bu shi da yu block

I agree with your block of admin Ta bu shi da yu for "Votesacking....Violation of WP:CANVASS...please stop". I had posted this a day prior which goes into some unfortunate behavior. It was obvious to me that he was on the edge and likely burnt out (or that his user account was compromised). I was hoping that he would take a break from editing and come back when refreshed. Unfortunately, he didn't. -- Jreferee t/c 15:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

For the record, your block wasn't what made me leave (though obviously I didn't like it). You are a good admin, couldn't have been easy to block another admin. You did the right thing. Stick to your guns on things like this. I might/might not have done the same thing. Figured you should know. - 211.30.71.131 (talk) 05:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

User:85.178.151.155

Hi, this user is still breaking 3RR on several other articles, even after your recent warning and protection of one page, and warnings by other users to stop, he's broken 3RR on several pages in a matter of hours, and he's removing tons of sourced texts from pages like this which is vandalasim. [1] --07fan (talk) 00:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Gundam Mk-II

Please forgive me if I come off like one of those "wrong version" whiners - while I appreciate you stepping in with regards to the ongoing edit war, it looks like it's been protected mid-edit by L-Zwei (talk · contribs). The current version uses the infobox favored by consensus, but the templates and page layout that A Man In Black (talk · contribs) feels are more important than the three revert rule. The image RX-178S.W.gif is used multiple times, among other things, and it currently looks like a mess. Would it be impertinent of me to request a revert to the previous version that has been agreed upon by consensus? MalikCarr (talk) 03:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Very well then; thanks for your time. MalikCarr (talk) 04:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA for Canadian Paul

Four years ago this day, a foreigner was voted by the community to serve a land that he loved. Today, a new foreigner humbly accepts the charge and support of serving a community that he loves. Hopefully, he won't disappoint. Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a vote of (47/0/1). The trust bestowed upon me by the community is one of the most touching honours that I have ever received, and I vow not to let you down. Whether you have suggestions for ways in which I could improve, a request for assistance or just need someone to listen, my talk page and my email are always open. I pledge to do what I can to help this project, in the words of a man who needs no introduction, "make the internet not suck." A special thank you goes out to Tim Vickers for nominating me. Cheers, CP 22:49, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for taking the time to comment on my RfA. I understand you did not feel quite up to supporting me, but that's a Good Thing(tm). If you tell me what was in my responses to your questions that worried you, I'll be especially careful around where you feel I'm weaker. — Coren ^(talk) 23:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Remembrance Day #3

Thanks for the notice. Is my aid needed? Ktsquare (talk) 05:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

NPOV of China Map.png

Please take a look at Image_talk:China_map.png and answer my questions. Thank you. Magnifier (talk) 23:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Moving a page

Hi Nat -

There was recently a discussion and poll on organizing and appropriately moving the articles on the Commownealth realms' monarchies. The result was to have them all the same, and titled in the common "Monarchy of [xxx]" format. There was some dissent, however, the result seems clear after the 5 days required by WP:RM.

However, one editor is particularly obstinate in his opposition to the moving of British monarchy to "Monarchy of the United Kingdom." Two of us involved in the discussion don't feel our moving the page will be accepted by this user, and will result in a revert war. Thus, could you, as an uninvolved admin, please perform this move for us? Cheers. --G2bambino (talk) 00:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I second that request. GoodDay (talk) 00:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, if the formulated text says it...

I guess I have no choice but to obey. It's clear that there was no consensus. Following bureaucratic procedures is less important than indicating the real situation, which is that there's a lack of consensus. In some cases, it would be inappropriate to change - for instance, an attempt to change from "no consensus" to one of the options would clearly be inappropriate. But that's not because of some bureaucratic rules. That's because it's worse to claim a consensus when there is not one than to acknowledge what is clearly a case of a lack of consensus. john k (talk) 18:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, just saw G2 and GoodDay's comments above. This seems to revolve around a misunderstanding of wikipedia procedures on their part which is considerably more serious than my technical violation of the conclusion of the supposed vote. The situation is not a "run out the clock" situation where if nobody objects within a certain period of time, the right to object runs out. There is a clear lack of consensus for a move. Thus, the move should not be carried out, whether or not technical procedures have been carried out to the letter. Is a 5-3 vote (with one additional user having previously expressed himself on the "3" side)? Does the fact that Tharkun and I did not object until after the artificial 5 day period was up (but before the move was actually carried out) make our objections irrelevant? Does it really make sense to move an article when there are clearly strong objections to a move? Procedures should not be raised above the goals which they are supposed to promote. The reason we have RM procedures is to insure that moves don't carried out unless there's a consensus for them. If there's clearly not a consensus, as there isn't in this case, it doesn't matter if the RM procedures have been carefully observed or not - the page doesn't move. john k (talk) 18:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for protecting the article millisecond

Thank you for protecting the article millisecond. I believe there is a discussion which will need to happen concerning this articles content. It is in need of some referencing. --CyclePat (talk) 20:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC) p.s.: You have probably saved me from much embarrassment of reverting and possibly being blocked. Thank you. --CyclePat (talk) 20:43, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

May I ask if you heard about this from the 3RR board? --CyclePat (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Itub

I refer to [2]. As a scientist and a chemist myself, 1 E-3 s article seems fine as it is. I disagree that Itub was engaging in 3RR because I find the reverts to be justifiable in that we should never cite ourselves as a reference, such as in here: [3] It is my opinion that User:Cyclepat is trolling. Perhaps we should not feed him? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 01:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Commonwealth realm

Nat- could you please see the request here. Thanks. --G2bambino (talk) 16:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Salut!

Uite si un haiduc in Canada? cu multe contributii pe WP :). Bravo :) Numai bine, --HappyInGeneral (talk) 13:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

In case you don't speak Romanian, my apologies, and still welcome! :) --HappyInGeneral (talk) 13:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Just read a bit more through your user page, well if you need help with translating something not very long in Romanian, I will gladly help you :) Kind Regards, --HappyInGeneral (talk) 14:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Pelasgians

Nat, can you please take a look at that page, I think a guy misbehaves and crossed the line with POV pushing and calling people names, I'm only remotely involved, I'm not a main editor of that page, I followed it only because I've done some small edit or reverted a vandal. Thanks. -- AdrianTM (talk) 05:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Premier of the Republic of China, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Daniel 01:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

PS: You were listed after the case was filed, as a "user that had commented on the issue". Although your input is welcome and appreciated should you choose to give it, the case will proceed without your acceptance if you choose not to participate at all (which occurs occasionally with outside commenters in RfM's). Thanks, Daniel 01:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Re:China

:D

Hmmm...

I'm flattered that you asked my opinion

I notice User:HongQiGong had a problem with it as he reverted your edit - he complained about "trad vs. simp" -traditional vs. simple chinese characters I suppose? In regards to getting consensus in the talk page before editing - Wikipedia as a bureocracy feels bizarre.

What do I think? I think it is much better than the one that was there before in the China page -Obviously in the right direction and I think it is rather nice in general. I think it's very good work.

--Keerllston 04:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

By the way -the commenter User:Quagliu deleted your warning from user talk:Quagliu.--Keerllston 04:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Problem with Image:Chinaimg.png

Please see commons:User talk:Nat. Thanks --Matt314 (talk) 19:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)