Open main menu

User talk:Sam Spade/ - archive/Januar 2006

< User talk:Sam Spade‎ | - archive

Current time: Saturday, October 20, 2018, 06:39 (UTC)


Leave a messageEdit

User talk:Sam Spade/ - archiveEdit


(archived @ User:Sam_Spade/Quotes)

  • "Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others."


User:Sam Spade/Art and artists



A baby marginated tortoise free of its shell
Alexis (1629–1676) was the tsar of Russia from 1645 until his death. Born in Moscow on 29 March 1629, the son of Tsar Michael and Eudoxia Streshneva, the sixteen-year-old Alexis acceded to the throne after his father's death. Boris Morozov, a shrewd boyar open to Western ideas, took charge of Russia in the early years of Alexis's reign, but was exiled from Moscow following a popular uprising. Alexis responded to the uprising with a new legal code. His reign saw wars with Poland and with Sweden, a schism in the Russian Orthodox Church, and the major Cossack revolt of Stenka Razin. Alexis was married twice and had sixteen children, including tsars Fyodor III; Ivan V; Peter the Great; and Sofia, who ruled as regent for her brothers from 1682 to 1689.

This oil painting, made by an unknown artist in the 1670s, is now located in a museum in Ptuj, Slovenia.Painting: Unknown

To include this picture of the day on a page, add the text {{pic of the day}}.

Merry ChristmasEdit

I would like to wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and all the best in the year ahead. Guettarda 15:34, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

And to you, thank you. Sam Spade 18:40, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

AMA RequestEdit

If you're still looking for help Sam I'm back now and working. Wiki-break over. --Wgfinley 04:31, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Why thank you! As you can see below, the case against me has just concluded, but based on some of the ominous statements made by the ARBCOM, your help might be vitally needed in the future. Thank you in advance (and Happy Holidays!), Sam Spade 21:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Got your message, after reviewing everything I too was disappointed about the decision after everything I saw. My advice though, especially since the decision just came down, is to step away from all things concerning him for the moment. Just take a step back for a bit and hopefully cooler heads will prevail, I know you to be a far better man than someone who has an endorsed vanity page. --Wgfinley 06:16, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry christmasEdit

Sam, have a merry christmas and a happy New year. all the best to you and your family.

Raj2004 12:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

And happy holidays for you and all of yours! :)
Sam Spade 21:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Raj2004 17:45, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Final decisionEdit

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Nobs01 and others case. Raul654 17:55, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


Not much of one, but I happened to look in a bit. What I'd say first is that there are 42 million Christ-masses outstanding for the immediate year one, and then I'd say that on acount of that (which we have to be big enough to allow ourselves the present of some forgiveness towards ) - anything else, we wear as a badge of honour . EffK 20:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Tycho's SupernovaEdit

I wanted to link the pic of the day (Image:Tycho-supernova-xray.jpg) to the Tycho's Supernova article. But it's locked. Maybe you know how to do this. Or should we just wait?

Regarding Association of Members' AdvocatesEdit

Hi, you are recieving this message because you have listed yourself as an active member of WP:AMA. If you aren't currently accepting inquiries for AMA, please de-list yourself from Wikipedia:AMA Advocates accepting inquiries, and consider noting it on the main list of members on WP:AMA. If you are, please consider tending to any new requests that may appear on Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance. We're going to put AMA on wheels. :) (please direct any responses to my talk page) --Phroziac . o º O (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!) 22:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Fascism and ideologyEdit

I am sorry that you are not well versed on the subject of fascism. It must be a burden. I rewrote the text on Fascism and ideology repeatedly, while you mostly deleted and reverted. Please learn how citation actually works. A citation to a minority view does not trump a citation to one of the world's leading authorities on fascism. We just got out of arbitration where it was suggested you learn how proper citation actually works. It was a good idea. Please take it seriously. I did not violate the 3RR role. Stop trying to make a record for another arbitration. Assume good faith. Please do not leave messages for me on my user page. Please carry out all future conversations with me on editorial discussion pages.--Cberlet 03:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

talk page biasEdit

Sam, is it tolerable to express a POV on a talk page. I understand that a NPOV is imperative in an article, but isn't the discussion page for discussion, including the expression of any opinions one might have? Two of my opinions have been deleted by a certain user on a specific talk page, claiming they were "POV vandalism". Specifically, the issue was about whether or not Beethoven was "black", and I argued that he wasn't and cited sources and commented on the subject, and this person simply deleted everything I had said regarding Beethoven's race on the talk page. I invited this person to explain his actions on my talk page but he hasn't yet (this happened just today). What is the solution? Am I wrong to express my "POV"? --Jugbo 05:10, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

You are allowed to speak your mind on a wikipedia talk page, so long as you are civil, and on topic. Breaking those rules are the only reasons your comment should have been deleted. I will look into the matter. Sam Spade 15:51, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. --Jugbo 16:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I would like the contribution history of my IP address (i.e. what I said before I had an account) on it's "special page" to be shown on the "my contribution" page of my user page. Can I do this, and how? Thanks. --Jugbo 19:09, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it can't or won't be done, due to technical and labour issues, but have a look @ Wikipedia:Changing username and its talk page, maybe you can find something. Sam Spade 21:06, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll take a look. --Jugbo 00:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Final StatementEdit

Thanks for alerting me. Jayjg (talk) 03:38, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

You are welcome, and thank you for your note. Sam Spade 03:45, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Proposal pending at 9/11 conspiracy theoriesEdit

I have officially proposed to split the 9/11 conspiracy theories article, with the two most in depth areas being moved to separate articles at Allegations of Jewish or Israeli complicity in 9/11 and Allegations of U.S. government complicity in 9/11. I feel this will help alleviate the problem of the main article being too large and allow these two distinct concepts to be discussed in depth separately. Further division may be in order in the future, but I feel this is an important first step. Please check out the discussion at Talk:9/11_conspiracy_theories#Proposal_to_split_this_article. Thank you. Blackcats 07:29, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Arn't those the same thing? Most conspiracy theories involving Israel involve the USA, and vice versa, yes? Have a look @
Sam Spade 17:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


Thank you for your support in my request for adminship. I was promoted with a final tally of 31/1/1. Please don't hesitate to contact me if there is anything I can assist with. --BorgQueen 22:57, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thats wonderful, thank you! Sam Spade 23:10, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you SamEdit

Thanks for your welcome and links. I am still trying to get my sea legs. Perhaps I need the same 8 year old who shows me how to use the controller on the DVD to show me how to use the Wikipedia tools. But I'll try.

Billyblog 21:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC) Billyblog

Have a look @ Wikipedia:Tools. Cheers, Sam Spade 21:43, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

User talk:LankenauEdit

Hi Sam,

thanks putting up user infos on my discussion page and welcoming me. I had been hired recently by the University of Heidelberg and the Epigenetics Network of Excellence (NoE) to link specific keywords which are in the interest of the NoE with Wikipedia. You may want to check on this issue at Webconsulting box: Glossary

It would be great if - in future - I could count on your expertise with Wikipedia.

cheers, Dirk


You may want to weigh in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Childlove movement. Homey 19:54, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Happy New YearEdit

For last year's words belong to last year's language

And next year's words await another voice.
And to make an end is to make a beginning.
T.S. Eliot, "Little Gidding"
Happy New Year! ≈ jossi ≈ t@ 20:24, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Sam! --Viriditas 01:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)


Have a blessed new year, wherin you kindle the flame of righteousness!

Sam Spade 02:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)


I cut that short, and you know why.Check out my idea for a article template. HNYEffK

Look Sam, in case you hadn't noticed , I'm dealing with the most severe criminality. I could inculpate myself badly by relating this to lesser crime. I deal in mental crime, by the lights of laws as stated. I see no reason to allow that WP should be trusted when I have every knowledge of these vicious inculpations. It is no reflection upon you personally that I draw this line. It is also my stated belief that side/emailing tilts the playing field, but to be honest that is secondary . Try open comm'n. or...better since you are apparently identified, leave the arena. I suggest this in your interest, not in mine, as you have proved to me your even keel. You got into a thing with this other vanity question, and it is a sidetrack. I spent hours tracking is it Zordrac, and I don't think the 'Brandt' type calculations come near the real issues here. None of these guys, like Cberlet, are talking murder(yet). Where do you want to comm.? Can we keep it like jesus, in a parable, huh? And I got yr saying something about my politics- listen, I have no politics. A residual optimism floating upon the history .I come into the new year saying positivo. Anyway what's on your mind, Sam? yrs EffK 02:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I want to make comments which seem inappropriate to make here, and may violate wiki policy. A confidential means of communication would be prefereable. Sam Spade 02:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I gather you are having your behaviour tested. I doubt whether you could need to say anything that I couldn't imagine. I should say to you what you have always said to me, like be very nice to one's enemy. Fact is that this bloggin form of interaction is just as heavy as the street. It has to be wondered why we bother...but go for it Sam, say it very carefully and Ill try and understand. I hate to see you being sucked away from your admirable stance of absolute restraint, and especially for a cause that appears minor. I'll read up and if I can see any advice to give I'll be back to you.EffK 11:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Racialism and Talk:Racialism/Version CEdit

Thank you so much for your work in racialism. Seems like a good chunk of Talk:Racialism/Version C got implemented. --Yonghokim 05:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Your welcome, but I am less pleased w the result. If you compare the two versions, you'll see little of my work in the current article. Sam Spade 05:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


As I told Ambi, I make no judgements on either of you, or really much on Kelly, but I am enforcing both the spirit and the letter of WP:NOT WP:RPA WP:NPA WP:CIVILITY. If you want to berate Ambi, take it to her talk page. If you like the old RFC, go ahead and say so, but you are perfectly capable and required by the above policies to do it nicely--Tznkai 08:36, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

You are in error, and have lost my respect. Please rethink your actions. If they are of any merit, someone else will do the work for you. Sam Spade 08:39, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

from the RfCEdit

Thanks for your response - I think taking it here was a good idea. Above all, I hope you understand that Philwelch and I weren't trying to dictate a solution onto everyone else yesterday. Rather, I think it's fairly clear that nothing much could come out of the old RfC, except more anger and bitterness from both sides, and it was a good-faith effort to try and redirect that energy into a form where something good might come out of it.

I think you summarised my position fairly accurately. I don't think there was any inherent harm done in deleting those userboxes. I think it was reasonable to be bold in the first place - just as it was reasonable that, when people disagreed, the boxes were re-created. With this in mind, I'm struggling to see any lasting damage done here, though I could have missed something.

While I understand that you're not fond of Kelly and want her voted off the arbitration committee, I don't think this is the way to go about it. For starters, I think the backlash against Kelly is doing far more harm to the community than her actions ever did, and I think the longer it goes on, the more bad feeling that is created, and the greater the likelihood of there being acrimony and retaliation down the track against not only Kelly, but a myriad of others involved, including you. You've made your point, and I think now would be a good time to start working towards some resolution that's amicable to all parties involved, rather than furthering this in the name of personal revenge. Ambi 09:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Let me be clear: I don't care about userboxes (at all), and I have no desire for revenge on Kelly Martin (for what I don't know, she hasn't done anything to me that I am aware of). I also have nothing against her as a human being (non-wikipedian).
What I do have are concerns, comments, and possibly a great deal of evidence (if I can be arsed to spend an hour or 2 hunting up links) regarding her suitability for positions of power on the wikipedia. The concerns which relate directly to the RfC are: out of process deletions, unwaranted blocks, and numerous violations of civility / conduct unbecoming her position. I frankly feel she has handled herself very badly indeed, and that a great deal of fuss regarding that is in order.
I am, however, nothing if not rigourous, and will personaly favor the closing of her RfC if she makes suitable comments of contrition. Outside of that, I see no imminent danger to the wikipedia, or indeed anyone (myself included) from people complaining about her conduct. On the contrary, I see the groundswell against her as the most hopeful sign I have seen on the wiki in ages, immediately correlated in my mind with the size of the donation meter. People care about what is going on here, and are putting their $0.02 (or $20, as the case may be), in. All hail populism! Death to wiki-elitism! Sam Spade 09:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


Sam, If you are intrested please vote here- Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja

I voted, but I couldn't answer easily... IMO all enlightened men are avatars of God, all truths his word, and most religions good, ayyavazhai included. I don't think Vaikundar can be the second coming of Christ, because prophecies were not fulfilled, and the earth is not united in a perfect state. It would seem he was a very holy man however. Sam Spade 07:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Rfc against DabEdit

Sam, I respect your opinion as I think you are unbiased person and try to look at all viewpoints. A rfc has been filed against Mr. DBachman. see, I am not sure about your dealings with him. Please feel free to comment.


Raj2004 00:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I did, and as usual yours was the calm and wise voice among those who were angry and defensive. I am very glad to see you were able to criticise constructively, and without unfair attacks. Sam Spade 06:49, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Sam You wrote an excellent and well written critique of Dab. Dab does make good edits but he needs to be more open minded and respectful.

Raj2004 11:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Sam, Dab replied to our arguments if you want to reply:

Raj2004 01:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Matt Furey criticism linkEdit

Hi, I was just wondering why you restored the url which I removed. The article calls Furey fat (and bald, as if that's relevant) a bunch of times, makes a couple of kinda funny fat jokes, makes some claims about Furey's credentials without citing references, and caustically jokes about Furey's greed and hype merchandising. I'll agree at least with the last part, but I still don't think the article is a useful link, and certainly doesn't approach (nor claim, nor intend to approach) Wikipedia's standards.

I don't care sufficiently about Furey, or the article about him, to argue about this or to remove the link again. That said, as a relative n00b, I'm curious as to why you chose to restore the link.

Thanks. Kfor 03:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I actually don't think its important either, but critics of furey love that "fat bastard" stuff. For example, this letter probably inspired that post, or vice versa. I like Furey myself, but I think its important to give the readers all notable opinions on the man, even if they are unfair or foolish. Sam Spade 06:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Gotcha. I guess it'd be good to have more concrete criticism, but giving an example of typical criticism is useful too. Thanks for the explanation. Kfor 19:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Banno RfAEdit

I am standing for admin. Would you care to comment? Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Banno Thanks. Banno 23:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I now have a few extra tabs at the top of my Wikipedia pages. Thanks for your support. Banno 08:01, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


Sam, Brahman in Hinduism is defined as the impersonal absolute which can never be defined. according to advaita, for grace of the embodied human being, manifests into a personal God, (i.e., Saguna Brahman, which is called Vishnu, by Vaishnavites, Siva, by Saivites. Neo-Vedantists would extend this further to a Christian concept of God. But even in more theistic forms of Hinduism, such as Vaishnavism and Saivism, although Vishnu and Siva are commonly depicted with humanoid form, devotees of those faiths are reminded that in reality, God has no definite form. That's why Siva is worshipped always in temples in an abstract form, linga. Vishnu is also worshipped in an abstract form, called a saligrama

As Sri K. Thirugna Sambantha, in his web site of Saivism, [1], explains that the Siva lingam is the ruparupa aspect because it is neither a manifested form of Siva, nor is it formless, because the linga is a tangible piece of stone, and an symbol of God. Thus, it is intermediate between the formless Absolute, Parasiva, or Brahman which is beyond the sensory perception of man, and the many manifest forms of Siva. Brahman is worshipped through the Gayatri mantra.

This mantra is the most sacred mantra in Hinduism and is recited, regardless of denomination, as it is a hymn to Brahman.

Hope this helps.

Raj2004 03:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

One thing I like alot about ayyavazhai is the focus on rudrakasa and/or mirror in worship, rather than a man made symbol. I think this is healthy symbolicly, showing that it is God we worship, not our representation of him. From what I find on the wiki, the Gayatri mantra is focused towards Savitŗi, Sāvitrī or Devi Saraswati. is that perhaps inaccurate, or are things a bit complex? Sam Spade 05:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you have to remember rudrakasa is used in Saivite worship and ayyavazhi borrowed it. worshippers of Siva use the linga in worship like ayyvazhi uses the mirror. The Gaytari mantra has several interpretations. that is correct. but it also has been interpreted as a prayer to brahman.

Raj2004 11:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Sam, in even in both Saivism and Vaishnavism, "God has no one form, but every form, favouring only that of righteousness." I think no one worships Brahman as Brahman in the Vedas is never defined and defies definition. The Vedas are said to be eternal, never created and even names for God such as Vishnu, Shiva, Yahweh are merely human convention. Vishnu and Siva are the same as Brahman and are human conventions to define the essence of God, which never be completely defined. Brahman is beyond all names. The notion of restricting Brahman’s identity to any name or label, may be considered derogatory to the supreme glory of Brahman. That's why I think Brahman is not worshipped. Remember Shiva and Vishnu, although portayed with humanoid features, is really formless, and as you say, " od has no one form, but every form, favouring only that of righteousness." That is also the view of Saivism and Vaishnavism. That's also the symbolic meaning of Krishna revealing His universal form; see God is within us and is every form and also transcends us; i.e., panentheism.

Hope this helps.

Raj2004 02:25, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

We agree, I simply feel more comfortable not restricting his glory w any one name or image. I use God, but that is of course a general term, rather than a specific name. Sam Spade 07:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Spawn ManEdit

The following appeared on my talk pageEdit

wtf? is that the latest wikiscript instruction technique, or what? Sam Spade 22:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Huh? Spawn Man 22:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I myself am just getting used to wiki-footnotes. Your link [2] was somewhat helpful in that regard. Your other comments however warrant a "wtf?" at best. Sam Spade 05:33, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I was confusedEdit

I, at first, could not make heads or tails of your comments. After verifying you made no ccomments or changes to the dinosaur article or its talk page and no one impersonated me on your talk page I was left with the conclusion that you must be talking to Spawn Man on my talk page. If that is not the case, please clarify. WAS 4.250 17:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I was talking to him. Sorry to have confused you. I have every page I ever edited on my watchlist, talk pages included. When I read that I felt a need to respond, sorry if it confused or annoyed you. Cheers, Sam Spade 08:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


Hello, you are receiving this message because your name is on the list of members of the Association of Members' Advocates. There is a poll being held at Wikipedia talk:Association of Members' Advocates for approval of a proposal for the revitalisation of the association. You are eligible to vote and your vote and input are welcome. Izehar 22:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


I reverted back basically what you did with a few changes. I still think it needs cleaned up a bit but otherwise good, I appologize for being a bit nasty before... --Mista-X 23:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry, your good, and the article is improving. Have you trained in systema? From the few images I saw it looks very different from what I am used to. Sam Spade 08:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

An InvitationEdit

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity

The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.


A.J.A. 22:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


Images should not be removed from articles until they have been properly deleted. Sam Spade 09:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

You'd prefer page after page of red image links because the deleting admin was too busy to remove the image from the pages using it? Better to run the bot now, while it's still easy to find out what pages are using the image. --Carnildo 02:10, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Alot of these will never, or should never be deleted. Why not run the bot to clean up the dead links after their deleted? Sam Spade 07:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

By my count, at least 15,000 of them have been deleted so far. And removing the links afterwards is much harder -- right now, all the images are nicely grouped into a few categories, and each image description page has a list of articles that need action. By waiting, the bot instead needs to trawl the list of deleted articles (which must be done at least once a day -- things are deleted too fast to miss a day), try to guess which ones are images that were speedy-deleted, check "what links here" for each of them, and only then figure out which pages need action -- and in the meantime, half the time an admin will have spent the extra time needed to remove the image from articles, when the bot could just as easily done it for them. --Carnildo 07:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

The added dificulty is well worth the images which are never deleted. Sam Spade 08:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Arbcom candidate userboxEdit

Greetings. I've made a new userbox for arbcom candidates to show on their userpages so that visiters will know they're running.

{{User arbcom nom}}

If you'd like to place it on your userpage, feel free. Regards, – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 02:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Second comming of ChristEdit

I accept. I just created it on the basis of some sugesstions by some followers of Ayyavazhi as Vaikundar so. But personally I have a doubt (sugesstion) that the socond comming of Christ is same as Dharma Yukam (second comming of Vaikundar) in Ayyavazhi. Because the same is told there that, "I will come to rule when all the people gets united."- Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja

Yes, and we are not yet united. IMO an important step is understanding the truth behind the mythology and allegory of world religions. When we understand that no one mans path is most correct, but rather the goal (learning to love, love of God, love of neighbors), we are closer to that unity. To change the world, we must start inside ourselves. Sam Spade 07:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Alternative AMA proposalEdit

Sam, check out the interim proposal I put up on the AMA talk page. Let me know what you think. A halfway point between nowhere and this new thing? Wally 19:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

NAMBLA pollEdit

I am not sure if you were aware of this, but the poll had more than one question. Below the question of whether it is a pederasty organization, is a repeat of the question you had voted on above -- asking whether it's an LGBT organization. I figured you might want to know, in case you wanted to repeat your earlier vote. Corax 22:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Homeschooling projectEdit

Hello Sam, and thanks for your interest in our project. Is there something specific about projects that you believe I am missing, or is your note about WikiProjects just a general recommendation? I have read that section through a few times, and consult it daily. It has provided valuable information up to this point, but what this project needs is an experienced and dedicated team. Where would you like to start? Master Scott Hall 14:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

not sure, I mentioned the wiki-project mainpage because you seemed concerned about some of the wiki-bureaucracy, and havn't yet created it in the wikipedia namespace. I'm beginning to get an impression that your more modest than clueless however, so I'll return your question. What needs done before you officially create the project? Sam Spade 16:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
WP suggests that we assembled a team of 5-10 before starting the project in earnest. So far, we have three firm, 5 not-so-firm. I think we are close, but I posed the question on the temporary project page to get some input on the size of the group. Thanks, Master Scott Hall 17:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Project Launch. The Homeschooling project has moved to its new home at Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative education. Please visit the project page at your earliest convenience. If you have already discovered the move, please disregard this message. Thanks, Master Scott Hall 16:01, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Project Update: Our WikiProject Alternative education is going well. A large number of relevent articles have been assembled, evaluated, and sorted for the Adopt an article list. Alternative education (talk) and homeschooling (talk) have been selected as Focus articles. Please add them to your watch list so you can keep track of the latest changes, contributions, and discussions.
We want everyone wants to to stay as involved as they want, no matter how little time they have to contribute. If you've got a lot going and you simply can't find the time for regular contributions, just drop in from time to time to add your input to ongoing discussions. More input makes it easier for more active editors to make sure that their efforts are working toward concensus. If you feel that you don't have enough background in the subject at hand to make material contributions, you can still help by proof-reading and checking for readability. So, stay in touch, stay involved. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 07:36, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Great thanks! Sam Spade 12:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


You commented on Kelly Martin's second RfC. it is up for archival. you may vote at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Kelly_Martin#Archiving_this_RfC. CastAStone|(talk) 03:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Arvitration CommitteeEdit

Well, I'm not entierly sure, it's just that I didn't like the way it was written. However, after reviewing it, I am changing my vote to Neutral. Dr. B 22:24, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Hoorah! Sam Spade 23:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Sam Spade/ - archive/Januar 2006".