LonelyPilgrim

The Austin/Decatur Daily

Haha, actually I still go to Decatur, but, hmm, I've never heard of the Decatur Daily being biased towards Decatur High. I guess it just seems that the paper is bias towards Austin cause it gave one paragraph to our marching band, and 6 to Austin's. (AlabamaGuy2007 09:10, 25 March 2006 (UTC))

Well, that's because we're better. ;-p Are you a band person, too? Band bias was always something I was sensitive to, also. It seems like in athletics, the Daily favors whatever school is doing better in that particular year (which was almost always Decatur when I was in school), but band is so much more subjective. I remember one time being upset that the Decatur band got a full-page spread for its state contest superiors, without even any mention of ours. I was reading your Decatur High page today, and got a little indignant at first at the claim about the band having the state record for superiors. We were always told we had the state record. Then I read it more carefully, and checked my facts, and you're right. Decatur has the record for cumulative state superiors (54 total, I think), but Austin has the record for consecutive superiors (40 last year). And you're correct that Decatur has the record for consecutive district superiors. I was in band at Austin with Robbie Stout, BTW. And I actually worked at the Daily for a year, and can say with confidence that most of the apparent bias has more to do with who calls the reporters to be interviewed than with any prejudice on their part. They don't know things unless people tell them, and they don't go out of their way to interview people unless it's something really big. Most publicity has to be drummed up, and I guess the Austin band must just have a good publicist right now. BTW, I really appreciate all of the hard work you've put into articles about the North Alabama area. Keep up the good work. —LonelyPilgrim 05:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Haha, yea I'm a band person, Stout's our band director, he's........interesting, to say the least. Yea, I shoulda put in the detail about the cumulative superior ratings, didn't think of that. Well, thank you for the compliment.AlaGuy 03:40, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Capitalized University vs. university

Ok, well, I said my peace, and if it changes back, I'll not re-change them again. I can understand the pride thing, and if it in fact does exist, I'll not go against that grain. But, some of the others that I changed (the non-university ones) do not need to be capitalized.. but, yeah, interesting to note that it does make a difference at your _U_niversity :-) Madmaxmarchhare 23:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, if there is a "thing" with using University, you could state that in parentheses or in some other way so that likewise persons don't correct similarly. Madmaxmarchhare 23:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Jabez Leftwich

Incase you haven't noticed there is already one at the bottom of the page under the succession boxes. Futhermore, I do not agree with you method of organizing the page. The whole point of the "bioguide" template is to replace putting a title "Referances" and having a link under that to the source. I believe the link to Congressional Biography Database should go under "External links" because that is exacly what it is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Mystery Man (talk • contribs) 18:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC).

Albert Russel Erskine

Thanks for your kind words about this article! I picked it up as a dead link on the missing articles page, and did my best - he seems to have been rather an interesting figure of a kind now largely extinct at least in the West. I'm afraid I could only put in what I could discover on the web - there must be quite a lot of print archive material, especially at Notre Dame, but I don't have access. seglea 21:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Hey, I didn't break it, I fixed it! I resized it to its correct dimensions so it wouldn't show up all pixelated! ;) Frey 03:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hm!

I'm glad you got it figured out and looking good, but that's so odd! I wasn't sure about the syntax, either, and tried several different ways - but it seemed like when I saved it, it looked correct. Oh well! :)

I'm doing pretty well - it's been ages since I was doing anything on Wiki, though! Frey 05:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, LonelyPilgrim! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 03:17, 5 January 2011 (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) 13:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, LonelyPilgrim. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)