User:Denni/User talk:Denni/2005September Archive

Pic of the day

Hi Denni,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Mackerelskybig.jpg is due to make a reappearance as Pic of the Day on the 10th July. I've more or less used the same caption as last time, but you can make any changes at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/July 12, 2005. -- Solipsist 3 July 2005 18:42 (UTC)

Michael Shahbaz VfD

The subject of this VfD is mis-spelled, rather than non-notable; I have moved the article to the proper spelling. Might you reconsider your nomination in light of this? Cheers! -- BD2412 ^talk July 4, 2005 00:43 (UTC)

Re: Urethral gland

Hi Denni! I'm sorry if I offended you by not discussing my changes to this article. However, I didn't really feel that I was in disagreement with you so, to my mind, there wasn't much to discuss. It looked to me that you had marked the article for speedy deletion under the "Very short articles providing little or no context" policy. I agreed that, under that policy it was a speedy candidate, however, after checking the entry on this subject in Encyclopedia Britannica I decided to try to save the article by providing enough context to take it beyond being a candidate for speedy deletion. The original author is an active editor, so I hoped that he might come back to this and expand it beyond a stub (I doubt that it will ever be a large article however—Britannica has three sentences on the subject). I have no strong feelings on this article though, so if you feel that it is still a speedy candidate please feel free to re-apply the tag—I will let another admin look at it and make the decision on whether or not to delete. JeremyA 4 July 2005 01:45 (UTC)

Sahaba

Thank you for your credits and tips!

I have a very hard time to include everything i find, right now i have 1...2...3...4.. 32 windows upp doing resarch.. when i find somthing i just add it and quickly move on.. but ill add "this is a sahaba of Muhammad" to the beggining of my standard template :)

Have a nice day!

--Striver 4 July 2005 02:40 (UTC)

Hello!

I hope your donig fine :)

I have a disagreement with a admin, and i would appreciate to se your point of view.

You can find the argumentation in his talk page and mine talk page.

the whole boils down to that the admin refuses to let me add this to the [Ali] article:

"Shias belive Ali was born in the Ka'ba. Some sunnis agree to that, but some say it was Hakim that was the only one to be born in it, therefor exluding Ali. And a third group dissmis the whole notion of somebody having been born in it. With current sources, it can not be established wich is the biggest of the three groups."

Have a nice day!

--Striver 13:58, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmm... ok, that came as a surprise. Thanks for your time!

A second question if i may: How come that you do not deem those links to prove that some Sunnis belive that someone was born on the Kabaa? I mean, it dosen't prove that all do, or even manny, but surley it proves that some do?

--Striver 02:34, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Ok, so it does not even prove that the ones that made the site belive in it?

--Striver 02:51, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Now i understan how you mean. Thanks for your time and have a good day/night!

--Striver 03:03, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi Denni!

I hade made a really long article in where i presented the Sunni and Shia vews on hadith that deal with Nikah Mut'ah. I hade invested a lot of time in it, and was on my way do spend more time on it. Gues what? It was deleted!

I looked though the rules and found this in here: Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion

Sysops may immediately delete a page, so long as it satisfies one of the following criteria.

• 1. No meaningful content or history, text completely meaningless or unsalvageably incoherent (e.g. random characters). See patent nonsense.
• 2. Test pages (e.g., "Can I really create a page here?").
• 3. Pure vandalism (see also dealing with vandalism). This includes redirects created during cleanup of page move vandalism.
• 4. Reposted content that was deleted according to Wikipedia deletion policy.

--This does not apply to content that was undeleted according to undeletion policy.

• 5. Contributions made by a banned user after they were banned, unless the user has been unbanned. This is slightly controversial!
• 6. Temporarily deleting a page in order to merge page histories after a cut and paste move.
• 7. Any page which is requested for deletion by the original author, provided the author reasonably explains that it was created by mistake, and the page was edited only by its author.
• 8. Talk pages of already deleted pages unless they contain records of the deletion discussion and are linked from Wikipedia:Archived delete debates (this doesn't apply if the deletion discussion is logged elsewhere, like a VfD sub-page or other log).

My article did not resemble in any whay anything that is described there, so i would like to ask you to undelet it.

If you feel that the article does not deserve to be undeleted, i whould appreciat if you cared to motivated the decision for me.

The name of the article is: Hadiths connected with Mut'ah

Thank you for your time, --Striver 21:37, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

i Love YOU!!

Ther is still some justice in the world!!

yeaaaa!!

u--hm-- I mean: Thank you for your time, i enough people share your view to make it through undeletion :)

Peace!

--Striver 23:54, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, i will keep that in mind. Just for your information, the article was more than 5 pages long. I would gues 10-15 pages.

--Striver 00:02, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Sign your posts on talk pages!

Remember to always sign all of your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( ~~~~ ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which is very helpful. Thanks, Alphax ^τεχ 5 July 2005 02:24 (UTC)

Well, you forgot to here. And {{unsigned}} is such a pain to use when you don't run in UTC. Edit summaries are my other pet peeve. Alphax ^τεχ 5 July 2005 02:37 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3

PBurka pointed out that an important omission from this proposal: a band could meet WP:MUSIC criterion #5 (sharing a member with a famous band) and still be speedily deletable by this criterion. I've added a sentence to the proposal to reflect this: it now reads An article about a musician or music group that does not assert having released at least one album, nor having had media coverage, nor having a member that is or was also part of a well-known music group. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to VFD instead. Please consider if you support this new wording, and change your vote if not. Yours, Radiant_>|< July 5, 2005 09:54 (UTC)

CSD Proposal 3-B

You voted or commented on Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-B or Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-A or both. I have proposed a revised version, at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-C. This version is intended to address objections made by many of those oppsoed to 3-A or 3-B. The revised propsal refers explicitly and directly to the criteria at WP:MUSIC. If you have not already done so, please examine the revised proposal and vote on it also. Thank you. DES 6 July 2005 05:09 (UTC)

Mason Remey article

Just to say that I removed your request for speedy deletion on Mason Remey. An anon had removed all the text on the page about 20 mins before you turned up there (he did nothing else on wikipedia except that).

Hopefully you'll agree that its right, but I thought I'd let you know -- Tomhab 9 July 2005 00:37 (UTC)

Thanks

Cheers Deni, you seem like a decent bloke, are you resident in Canada? Nick Boulevard 22:54, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Moist Towelette

I'm curious why you removed the speedy delete from Moist_towelette. I thought only admins were supposed to do that, yet I didn't see you on the list of administrators. --Barista | a/k/a マイケル | T/C 23:34, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I've been doing RC patrol less than a week, so I think I may have been too hasty on adding speedy delete. --Barista | a/k/a マイケル | T/C 12:44, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

VfD

Can you explain your reasons for labeling Anti-Semitism article with VfD? Resurrected by anon article which originally was redirected to Religious_denominations_in_Poland contains statements which not only are clearly POVs but border with the vandalism. The issue of Polish Anti-Semitism has been addressed in a number of recently discussed and revised articles such as History of the Jews in Poland, Anti-Semitism, History_of_Poland_(1939-1945), History_of_Poland_(1945-1989), Kielce Pogrom, Massacre in Jedwabne. Do you really think that VfD this article is in the best interest of wiki community? Rather than rising already high temperature among some editor excited by VfD on Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_July_5#Category:Anti-Polonism and Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Anti-Polonism cool and rational approach should prevail. -Ttyre 00:03, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. --Ttyre 00:20, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

When voting for Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Anti-Semitism in Poland ends? --Ttyre 19:21, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Would you mind responding to my question? --Ttyre 16:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Anti-Semitism in Poland

Since you have submitted Anti-Semitism in Poland article for VfD it has been dramatically changed and is undergoing a revert war. Since a couple of dozen people already have voted on mostly original version of the article can you please revert it to the version at the VfD submission time and lock it? --Ttyre 01:31, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Strategic Policy Consulting

It is a candidate for speedy deletion under general criteria (4). Please see the associated VfD at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Strategic Policy Consulting which closed June 18, 2005. Since then, the article has been recreated twice, with essentially no new material other than a mild re-write which made it a non-copyvio. --Durin 02:47, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

The other Wiki

Saw you creating a talk page on my Wiki...and also saw that you have done Wheel of Time-related pages for Wikipedia. I thought of doing that, too, but I didn't feel like fighting over which characters deserved their own pages.  :-) And there's also a few articles on your list that make me suspect you might be a fellow Edmontonian...?

Anyway, welcome to "Concordances And Characters", if you feel like doing things there. If you want to work on Wheel of Time stuff, we should coordinate so we don't get in each other's way. I'm more likely to log into Concord than I am to Wikipedia these days.

Alfvaen 21:59, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Login timeout

In response to your July 16 post at the Village Pump:

You may want to go to "Internet Options" in the Control Panel folder and choose the "Privacy" tab. Make your browser accept all cookies. Also, check "remember me" when you log in. If you have more problems, please feel free to tell me! — Stevey7788 (talk) 20:44, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Molatar

What earthly reason did you have for restoring this pointless vanity page? It meets several aspects of a speedy candidate: not noteworthy, vanity based. Additionally it was one of series of related pages created by a obsessed anon user.

I have re-deleted it as we do not need a pointless VFD discussion on a vanity page. IF you can provide a good reason for allowing a VFD discussion (other than just a desire to follow due process) then please tell me. Manning 00:43, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

I've read your comments and I'm afraid I disagree with them wholeheartedly. The point of VFD is to resolve issues with the single goal of enhancing the quality of the 'pedia. It is not, and never has been a process to follow slavishly. From the early days the 'pedia has always been about quality, not process. Despite that - if you are really determined on this "following process" issue then go for it - I've got genuinely useful things to do. I just think you are wasting everyone's time with a stupid VFD issue that should just be allowed to die. Anyway, no offence intended and I hope we will agree on something else in the future. Regards Manning 01:48, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Categories

Hi there! Just thought I'd let you know that because of the templates on the "useful stuff" subpage of yours, you've put that page in certain categories that I'm sure you don't want it. The disambig template puts it in that category and the vfd template puts it in category:Pages on votes for deletion. The simple solution is to subst them in and then manually delete the category inks from the resulting code. It will be aesthetically identical. Thanks! --Dmcdevit·t 21:13, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Jean Baptiste Gustave Planche

Thanks! --Diderot 00:33, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Anti-Semitism in Poland

You put this up at VFD. The VFD was closed as no consensus (27:16 to delete - 62%).

As the result was "no consensus" you can move the old VFD and post a new one as soon as you wish, if you do. ~~~~ 00:30, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Page protection request

Please protect Creation science. See here for more details. -- BRIAN0918  04:00, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks much. -- BRIAN0918  04:15, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Non-existing towns/counties and VfD

Hi there. I noticed you listed all of those non-existing counties/towns of that anonymous IP on VfD. However, things which are clearly nonsense don't need to go through the already overfull VfD, but can get the speedy deletion shortcut - simply add {{nonsense}} instead of the Vfd header. Besides - that guy adding those hoax articles is a returning pest, I have deleted his nonsense several times already, and maybe other admins as well. andy 21:59, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Sistine Chapel Choir/Temp

You placed a speedy tag on this article with the explanation "posible copy vio Sistine Chapel Choir, indentical material posted here". I'm just curious about your reasoning. Have you evidence of copyvio? I was unable to find any, but my only resource was Google. In checking the main article, I note that it does not have the Early History section, which constitutes a significant portion of the article. (I will admit I am curious as to why this was simply not amended to the original.) Finally, the article appears to have been blanked at the same time the speedy tag was applied. I'm wondering why. (BTW, pleased to see another SETI screensaver user at work. Yay us!) Denni☯ 23:59, 2005 July 30 (UTC)

When one suspects a copy vio it is necesary to "blank" the page untill copyright status is established. The copy vio tags aren't always acurate. Infact for Sistine Chapel Choir it was a false warning. When one is suspecting a copy vio and blanks this page the copy vio template clarifies for us to not reintroduce copy vio material to the /temp . It's just the procedure. The parts that werent copyrighted were not blanked. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 11:20, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Yay for SETI! --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 11:20, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion#Admira Ismić and Boško Brkić

You voted in the VfD for Admira Ismić and Boško Brkić. I believe that this article was deleted without a clear consensus, and have nominated the article for undeletion. If you would like to contribute to the VfU discussion, please follow the link above. Thanks for your time! Pburka 00:17, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Mackerel Sky

Hi Denni,

Thanks for uploading the larger version of Image:Mackerelskybig.jpg - its one of my favourites. -- Solipsist 07:26, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Shlomi Harif

Hi, Shlomi Harif clearly did not meet criterion A7 for speedy deletion, please undelete it. Kappa 04:07, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

You rote (in part) Harif's claim to fame seems to be having published chapbooks. It did not take long for me to learn that a chapbook is a home-published book, using your own computer and printer. I think this is not the Oxford Press.

FYI, a chapbook may or may not be home-published. A professionally printed and separately bound pamphlet is often called a chapbook particularly when intended for sepcial limited distributution. Special printings of a single story by the guest of honor at major SF conventions (for convention distribution only) are typically considered chapbooks. The key elements are that a chapbook is of small physical extent, having fewer pages than an normal book, and it is a special publication for limited distribution. That last meas it generally fails to establish notability, of course. Many chapbooks contain content by notable authors, but they were notable before the chapbooks were published. DES ^(talk) 13:29, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support on the autism FAC!

Thanks! Its now a Featured article. --Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 03:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Back Roads

You're more patient than I with this User (abUser?) 152.163.100.132. I guess that's why you're an admin. ;-) hydnjo talk 02:55, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Eric Bobo

Allow me to first apologise for the delay in responding to your comment on my talk page, I'm not sure how it slipped past unaddressed. The point I took issue with was not your VfD'ing the article (despite the fact it was arguably a speedy candidate, but we won't belabour the point here); it was the slightly joky nature of your nomination text:

Jest havin' a little fun.

This looked very much to me, as someone who doesn't know your methods of operation, as if you were nominating the article for deletion in jest; for entertainment, etc. This could be construed as a bad faith nomination. No doubt it was a misunderstanding on my part, coupled with a slightly officious tone of response which didn't quite make clear what I had a problem with, which likely led to your misunderstanding. No harm done, now.

Incidentally, I'm well aware of policy, but I would like to know why you referred to "taking another administrator to task"? Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 01:47, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

OK, cool. And no, I'm not an admin. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 23:28, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi Denni!

Hi there - I replied to your comments on the Cambridge Arms, I'd just like to emphasise that just because I want to keep many things, doesn't mean that I want to keep everything - it is a little frustrating that every time one makes an argument for keeping (say) a pub, someone else comes back with 'well then, you must want to keep an article about my grandmother's toenail clippings then'. It's simply not true! Thanks listening to my rant! Yours, Trollderella 21:52, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your message Denni, I did take a look at Everything2, and frankly, it is not my cup of tea. I sympathise with your not wanting WP to become a repository for trivia, and not that one of the interesting things about VFD is that it tends to make one look more extreme than one might really be. I lot of what I vote to keep, I would readily agree should be brutally pruned and probably merged, it is simply that I don't think deletion is needed. The pubs might be a classic example of this. Redirects of all the pubs in Cambridge to an article (or perhaps even a list) of pubs would suit me fine. Is it a topic you're interested in working on? I wish there was a way to task out some of these vfds to people who were willing to try to make something of them, the 'for' or 'against' tends to mitigate against finding common ground. See you around, and thanks for the comments. Trollderella 00:50, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Human Rights Servey on Wikipedia (The final post of I_sterbinski)

Dear all,

Wikipedia was recently a subject of intensive research of an huge international human right organization. A team of people from different nationalities and ages were acting on Wikipedia for 20 days, investigating previously noted anomalities of Wikipedia free editing and forming a final report, which (between the others similar reports) will later be a guide to all future moves of the organization concerning Wikipedia. Acting under an account of a real person, their privacy is to be held private. Therefore, very few private information will be revealed.

Also, this is a result of the lack of final possition of the organization concerning Wikipedia and human rights, which was still not formed.

The team's final post on Wikipedia, where they explain their actions can be found on the following addresses:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:I_sterbinski

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Macedonia#Human_Rights_Servey_on_Wikipedia_.28The_final_post_of_I_sterbinski.29

The team would like to thank to all the persons who took part in the correspondence with us.

We also want to appologise for keeping our identity secret for a longer period.

Best regards,

Aleksandar, Biljana, Asparuh, Christos, Valjon, Michael and Ana Luiza

I sterbinski 01:20, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Rocks and Asteroids

I won't bother lengthening the VfD discussion with my somewhat off-beat thread, but I wanted to say that it was not intended by me as supporting the rock article (which is why I labeled it a comment rather than a keep). I don't view myself as either an inclusionist or deletionship but would like to see some consistency between areas and not just within areas. I think when we have many, many articles on very minor fictional characters and then argue about a professor who may be on the fringes of notability, that's silly. Which one is right, I don't know. When we have hundreds of porn actresses (and they all seem to be "stars") and hotly debate non-CEO businessmen as "not notable" is just goofy. And to set up a system which devotes well over a thousand articles to asteroids, lists of asteroids, discovers of asteroids, etc... (and which is set up for the ultimate expansion to all 90,000 if the red links are serious) while arguing about named geographical sites on this planet, seems a bit off. Since there are thousands of articles on individual episodes of TV shows, British railway stations, and other things that I never would have expected but seem to be well established, I just wanted to raise a comparison that I thought might cause some people to pause and think. No need to respond, I just like to vent occasionally. -- DS1953 20:37, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

Date formats

1922 May 22 is not standard date format on Wikipedia; see [[1]. I'm utterly mystified that you'd feel strongly enough about something as minor as changing a date format to actually deem it worth a revert. Bearcat 00:43, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm only aware of YY-MM-DD being the approved format when the month's number is used; I've never seen that format used when the month was cited by name. If Wikipedia hasn't joined the 20th century in that regard, then neither has any other newspaper, book or website I've ever seen in my life. As for why I'd change one and not the other, well, people do occasionally miss things the first time. Bearcat 01:07, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Serbian culture

I have been progressively expanding this article since it was nominated for deletion on Sunday. So far, I have added sections on literature, music, art, cinema and theatre. I will add more in following days. I may or may not have it completely finished by the close of the vote but wanted to let you know that I am working on it. I would be grateful if you could have a look at it. Capitalistroadster 07:14, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND 22:23, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Challenge yourself, and get ready to think!

Hello! Thank you for participating in Round Two of the Wikipedia:Mind Benders! The round will officially close on Friday, September 16, and round three (which is complete) will be open in the immediate days after that. A notice will be sent to you at least 48 hours before round three is set to open, to insure fairness. Round three offers 11 new exciting questions, this time written by Deryck C.. Please be sure to join in the fun! Also, congratulations to Riffsyphon1024 for winning our logo competition! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 20:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Note: This message has been sent by Flcelloguy using the NotificationBot (thanks to AllyUnion for designing such a great bot!). If you do not wish to receive further messages regarding WP:MIND, please contact Flcelloguy. If there are any problems with the bot, please alert AllyUnion. Thanks!

Automatic notification done by NotificationBot ((talk). Any bugs or errors, please report to bot owner. --NotificationBot 22:23, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND 06:19, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Denni/User talk:Denni/2005September Archive! This message is to inform you that round three of Wikipedia Mind Benders will open on Wednesday, September 21, at approximately 22:00 UTC. While the opening time may vary by two or three hours, the round will open no earlier than 22:00 UTC. In addition, there are several rule changes, which will be detailed when the round opens. Everyone who answers a question correctly will receive points, but speed does give some extra points! Round three offers 11 new exciting and mind-bogglind questions, written by Deryck C.. These promise to be lots of fun! We sincerely hope you join us.

Also, congratulations to ROYGBIV for winning round two; it was an extremely close game, with the runner-up, Spondoolicks, only two points behind. Let's keep round three competitive! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:31, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Note: This message has been sent by Flcelloguy using the NotificationBot (thanks to AllyUnion for designing such a great bot!). If you do not wish to receive further messages regarding WP:MIND, please contact Flcelloguy. If there are any problems with the bot, please alert AllyUnion. Thanks!

Automatic notification done by NotificationBot ((talk). Any bugs or errors, please report to bot owner. --NotificationBot 06:19, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND 06:22, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Denni/User talk:Denni/2005September Archive! This message is to inform you that round three of Wikipedia Mind Benders will open on Wednesday, September 21, at approximately 22:00 UTC. While the opening time may vary by two or three hours, the round will open no earlier than 22:00 UTC. In addition, there are several rule changes, which will be detailed when the round opens. Everyone who answers a question correctly will receive points, but speed does give some extra points! Round three offers 11 new exciting and mind-bogglind questions, written by Deryck C.. These promise to be lots of fun! We sincerely hope you join us.

Also, congratulations to ROYGBIV for winning round two; it was an extremely close game, with the runner-up, Spondoolicks, only two points behind. Let's keep round three competitive! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:31, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Note: This message has been sent by Flcelloguy using the NotificationBot (thanks to AllyUnion for designing such a great bot!). If you do not wish to receive further messages regarding WP:MIND, please contact Flcelloguy. If there are any problems with the bot, please alert AllyUnion. Thanks!

Automatic notification done by NotificationBot ((talk). Any bugs or errors, please report to bot owner. --NotificationBot 06:22, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND 06:22, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Denni/User talk:Denni/2005September Archive! This message is to inform you that round three of Wikipedia Mind Benders will open on Wednesday, September 21, at approximately 22:00 UTC. While the opening time may vary by two or three hours, the round will open no earlier than 22:00 UTC. In addition, there are several rule changes, which will be detailed when the round opens. Everyone who answers a question correctly will receive points, but speed does give some extra points! Round three offers 11 new exciting and mind-bogglind questions, written by Deryck C.. These promise to be lots of fun! We sincerely hope you join us.

Also, congratulations to ROYGBIV for winning round two; it was an extremely close game, with the runner-up, Spondoolicks, only two points behind. Let's keep round three competitive! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:31, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Note: This message has been sent by Flcelloguy using the NotificationBot (thanks to AllyUnion for designing such a great bot!). If you do not wish to receive further messages regarding WP:MIND, please contact Flcelloguy. If there are any problems with the bot, please alert AllyUnion. Thanks!

Automatic notification done by NotificationBot ((talk). Any bugs or errors, please report to bot owner. --NotificationBot 06:22, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Birgitte Silverbow

As you mentioned, it's not a copyvio. You might want to point out which page it's moved from though, I think it's necessary to comply with the GFDL. That, and it'll prevent people from marking it as a copyvio :-) --fvw* 00:33, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Moved userpage comment

I noticed that this comment was left on your userpage - I'm taking the liberty of moving it to user:talk. Hope you don't mind :) --inks 22:44, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I would like to know why you felt compelled to delete my post regarding Murshida Carol Weyland Conner of Sufism Reoriented.

There is only one article on the Internet regarding her, and I entered the URL as a link TO it.

And you deleted it. I would like to know why. There is no 'copyright' issue, people have been crossposting URLs since the dawn of the Internet. One might say that is the very purpose of the Internet.

Karl Moeller

mkarl2@qwest.net I have no idea how else to contact you. if there's a way to do so on your 'home' page on Wiki, I must've missed it.

Image:Nowindow collar.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file you uploaded, Image:Nowindow collar.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

--Bash 22:59, 30 September 2005 (UTC)