User talk:Andrew c: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 04:22, 11 July 2007 editQuadell (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users107,341 edits Favor← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 22:37, 25 November 2024 edit undoNamiba (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers188,262 edits Notification: listing of Category:NCAA Division I men's lacrosse tournament venues at WP:Categories for discussion.Tag: Twinkle
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{not around\|3=26 December 2019}}
	{\| align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 5px; margin: 0em 0em 0.5em 1em; float: right; clear: both;" class="toccolours"		{\| align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 5px; margin: 0em 0em 0.5em 1em; float: right; clear: both;" class="toccolours"
	! style="border-bottom:3px solid; background:#eee;" \| Talk Page Archives:		! style="border-bottom:3px solid; background:#eee;" \| Talk Page Archives:
Line 11:		Line 12:
	\|-		\|-
	\|] (6 March 2007 – 21 May 2007)		\|] (6 March 2007 – 21 May 2007)
	\|}


	== Typebox ==

	I think that was the old typebox; it has since been replaced with the new one. Thanks for noticing this.

	] 04:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

	== Image:HFTtext.svg ==

	Hi. I've removed your CSD tag from ]. Please note that ] images and ] images are different; SVG's are better because they can be scaled easily without pixels (since they're based on ]). The CSD redundant image criterion applies only if the images are exactly identical. The SVG is better, but don't mark the PNG for deletion either. -- ] ] ] ] ] 19:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

	==Category:Periodic abstinence==
	Hi, Andrew. The result of the CfD at ] was Delete. Lyrl has since recreated the category. Would you weigh in at ]? Thank you! ] 17:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

	'''NOTICE:''' The old discussion at ] is now located at ]. ] 11:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

	== Moveable Type ==

	Hi Andrew,
	today I read about the problems with sxc.hu images. I'm the author/photographer of the image "Metal movable type.jpg" on "moveable type" etc. I was very pleased when I noticed my image at wikipedia. Certainly I would like to give wikipedia/wikimedia the permission to keep the image. What can I do?
	Willi

	== FA and deletion review ==

	I looked into deletion review: at the top of the very first section it says "'']''" I ] and the admin told me "''it would be appropriate for you to re-create it''". I researched and followed the correct Misplaced Pages guidelines to the best of my understanding. ] <sup> ] </sup> <sub> ] </sub> 14:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

	:I'm confused about how to proceed. As you had stated at ], we need to have a centralized discussion. I thought I had created that at ], pointing people there from all the relevant pages with an edit summary (so anyone who watched those pages would have an opportunity to comment), but now we have discussion at ] and also broken discussion on the Talk pages of editors who have been involved so far (like below). I do not agree with JdV's latest proposed suggestion, but because of the recent de-centralizing, I'm not sure where to continue. Is ] still a viable location? Or would it be best to do a CfD for rename? Or something else? ] <sup> ] </sup> <sub> ] </sub> 17:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

	==Birth control categories==
	So I realized that creating ] and ] could solve a lot of problems. I was able to pull in ], ], and ] into the latter, and ] and ] into the former. I cross-referenced between the methods and placed links at the top of both categories for easy referencing. I think these are really good categories. We can build upon each concept without muddling the two or causing confusion. Even ] and ] have a place; (in ] as well as ].) I don't think there's a need for ] anymore. Let me know what you think. ] 16:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

	==Article improvement drive==
	Hi, Andrew c. I have just started an ] for WikiProject Abortion. Please feel free to nominate an article you believe could use improvement. I think this might be a good way to help motivate and organise work on our project's articles. Thanks! -] (]) 01:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
	==More Excellent Work from Andrew!==
	Andrew, great work with the colour on ]! This is Wiki at its most satisfying. When positive contributions from editors just keep building on one-another, without conflict. Love your work, keep it up! :D ] 11:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
	:Hi Andrew, I'm working on copy edit for your wonderful article on the Chester Beatty Papyri. I have already given the topic '''high''' importance, and made a note in comments. I will continue to copy edit, and may find some more sources or text for the article if I have time. I will also check the quality criteria very carefully, I'm pretty sure I want to either rate it as a Good Article or nominate it for this category. I will make this rating and/or nomination within the next few days. Cheers Andrew! :) ] 02:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

	==CSS indent solution thanks==

	hey thanks for the constructive suggestion. so far, so good. ] 01:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Abortion debate==
	Hi, Andrew. Red Baron, who recently joined WikiProject Abortion, has reworked the article ]. It would be helpful to have another assessment, so, if you've the time, would you give the new version a look over? Thanks! -] (]) 02:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

	== User:Stevewk possible block evasion ==

	I believe an editor you blocked for 3RR is evading the block by using anon IPs. Would you please consider looking at ] and the page histories of the articles at which Stevewk was edit warring. Thanks for your consideration.-] 21:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
	:Have you considered a ]? -- ''']''' 00:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Pedantic Presumption==
	Andrew: Because you are not an admin and I have not violated any Misplaced Pages guidelines, I would find it much easier to deal with you if you didn't regularly presume to lecture me about Misplaced Pages guidelines . I cannot imagine why you have taken such a role upon yourself. Thanks.] 00:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
	:Thanks for the kind response.] 20:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Categorisation question==
	An editor recently added articles on individuals who have committed acts of ], such as ], to ]. I would be interested to know if other editors who have been involved in establishing the current WikiProject Abortion categorisation system think that these articles fit within the scope of this category. If you have the time (most likely after returning from your vacation), your input would be appreciated. Thanks! -] (]) 01:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
	:To clarify: I have begun a discussion at ]. Sorry for putting the cart before the horse. -] (]) 02:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
	::I was considering going ahead with removing the articles in question from Category:American pro-life activists, as there has been no objection since I posted my note on the talk page yesterday, so if you'd disagree with this move, I'd appreciate input. Thanks! -] (]) 02:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

	== Please Help ==

	Andrew can you come to my talk page and tell me how to revert an article to a previous version? Thanks.
	] 06:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Something of possible interest==
	Andrew, I saw this add and thought of your User page. Cheers. ] 21:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
	:Thanks. I'll look into that!-] 22:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

	== The USA state map ==

	I know you didn't make this, but you have modified it far more recently than the creators have, so I have a request - could you fix the ] to properly give some of it to ]? Thanks. --] 02:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

	== Researching Misplaced Pages Online Survey ==

	We are conducting research into the role of social norms in online communication. This research is funded by the European Union and is being undertaken by a coalition of European Universities (see http://emil.istc.cnr.it/?q=node/8). The research is designed to help us understand how social norms interact with the technology that supports online collaboration. We have selected 35 Misplaced Pages articles flagged as controversial for study. We are analysing the interactions on the discussion pages and are also seeking additional input from contributors to those discussions.

	As a participant in the recent discussion about a controversial topic - Abortion, I would be very grateful if you could follow the link to a simple questionnaire. This should take only 2 minutes to complete.

	http://survey.soc.surrey.ac.uk//public/survey.php?name=wiki_norms

	] 16:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Crucifixion eclipse==

	I just added some cats at ], then noticed that you just deleted some. Feel free to prune what you see fit, I won't contest your edits. ] 21:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Papyrus 45==

	Hey, nice work on the expansion of ]. I had been meaning to add some info to that, but you beat me to it--and probably did a better job at it than I would have, anyway. I also wanted to let you know that I nominated it over on the ] template, so if you'd like to provide some input or right a better hook for it then feel free. Happy editing! ] 04:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Random Smiley Award==

	<div style="background-color:#f9f0C9; border:1px solid #888850; clear:right; float:right; padding:2px; width:300px;">
	]<small>For your contributions to Misplaced Pages and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted <b>]</b><br />originated by ]<br />(])</small>
	</div>

	] 07:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Re:Signature==
	It's the CfD template that's broken not liking my signature which works ok on 99% of Wiki (I have seen same problem with Prod template). Feel free to refactor my sig to bare User: if needed for commenting there, I don't mind.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]\|]</span></sub> 03:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

	==My Pleasure==

	Thankyou for the note that you left on my talk page. Pleased to meet you ] 11:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
	==] -- Wow! -- Great work Andrew!==
	This is really impressive Andrew. Everything about your work shows thought, accuracy and clarity, and you are so productive! I already owe you a quality assessment at Chester Beatty Papyri (at least I did the importance rating) but now there is Biblical manuscripts too! :) I should be able to do these things this weekend. I have also noticed that your contributions go back a long way. On behalf of all who will read your work, and be guided by your helpful reclassifications of categories, thank you. ] 22:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

	== DYK ==

	{\| class="messagebox {{#ifeq:{{{small\|}}}\|yes\|small\|standard}}-talk"
	\|-		\|-
			\|] (22 May 2007 – 10 July 2007}
	\|]
	\|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with {{#if:{{{4\|}}}\|facts\|a fact}} from the article{{#if:{{{4\|}}}\|s\|}} ''''']'''''{{#if:{{{4\|}}}\|{{#if:{{{5\|}}}\|, \|, and}} ''''']'''''
	}}{{#if:{{{5\|}}}\|{{#if:{{{6\|}}}\|, \|, and}} ''''']'''''
	}}{{#if:{{{6\|}}}\|, and ''''']'''''}}, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ].
	\|} <!-- ], ] --> --] 16:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

	== Admin ==

	Andrew, that's extremely flattering, but I keep telling myself: a) to spend less time on WP, and b) when I am on, to spend more time writing articles & less on the rest. In what I do at the moment I don't, as they say at RfA, "need the tools", so I will decline your very kind offer. Really I think my most useful contribution is to keep filling the many gaps in coverage of my area(s); I'm fortunate in a fair degree of knowledge, and more importantly, lots of reference books. Have you thought of it yourself? I would be delighted to nominate you. Thanks again for thinking of me. ] 17:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

	Great. Let me check out the process & compose my speech! I've not done it before. ] 17:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

	Check out ] (recycling a sandbox) - is there anything significant I haven't covered? I kept it shortish, as I think that's what RfA prefer. When this is finished, I stick it on the page, & you have to accept, and answer the standard questions, before you press the button to take it live. ] 23:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

	Ok - page set up, with Alastair Haines co-nominating. The template didn't seem to work fully, so I had to add some bits manually, but it seems ok - ]. You answer the general questions, and then follow the instructions . Good luck! - which I'm sure you won't need. I'll keep an eye on it of course. ] 03:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
	:Is it possible for an admin candidate to have three co-nominators? Or would that be overdoing it? -] (]) 03:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
	:::Fine by me - I did think of asking you, after reading Andrew's talk page. I dare say no one would mind if you get in quick. ] 03:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
	::::Really? If I would have been aware of this sooner, I would've been quicker to act, but, I've slipped in my good word. -] (]) 04:34, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
	I added your stats to the talk page, but they didn't come out the way most people have them - in some ways I think it looks better as it is, but the lack of commas is confusing. By all means redo if you want to (and know how ...) . It seems to be off to a flying start. ] 04:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

	:::Ah, that's how you do it! ] 04:33, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

	== Featured Picture ==

	<!-- comment to force linebreak -->
	{\| align=center border=0 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=4 style="border: 1px solid #CC9; background-color: #cfc"
	\|-		\|-
			\|] (10 July 2007 – 18 August 2007)
	\|]
			\|-
	\|<center>'''Your ] has been promoted'''</center> Your nomination for ] status, ''']''', gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at ]. ] 05:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
			\|] (20 August 2007 – 11 October 2007)
	\|}
			\|-

			\|] (10 October 2007 – 23 November 2007)
	Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. ] 05:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
			\|-

			\|] (24 November 2007 – 19 January 2008)
	==More questions==
			\|-
	Since there have been other edits, nb you have a new RfA Q to answer. It seems to be going really well.... ] 02:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
			\|] (23 January 2008 – 17 April 2008)

			\|-
	:Glad to see things are going so well at your RfA (knock on wood). You are a very highly qualified candidate, so it's only logical that it go through easily (though nothing's a given with RfA). Best of luck. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 18:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
			\|] (19 April 2008 – 6 July 2008)

			\|-
	== RFA ==
			\|] (7 July 2008 – 1 February 2009)

			\|-
	Thank you for your time answering my question, and I voted support based on your record and your good answer. My question to admin candidates was a response to the recent massive IAR-based deletion of userboxes and project space pages. Regards. ]<sup>]</sup> 23:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
			\|] (3 February 2009 – 22 March 2009)

			\|-
	== Crowning moments ==
			\|] (26 March 2009 – 1 August 2009)

			\|-
	Greetings. I'm contacting you because you have experience in dealing with our non-free content policy as it pertains to images. A so-far unresolved issue deals with "crowning moments" for beauty pageant contestants. This specific issue is heated because of previous disputes between the aptly named ] and the obscurely named ], but the same issue could apply to many other classes of images as well. All parties have made their cases adequately, but consensus is still elusive, so the issue remains open long after other problems have been resolved. Could you go to ] and give your opinion? It would really help us to finish this issue and move on. Thanks! – ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 18:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)<br><small>(This message was copied to several other image-wonks at the same time.)</small>
			\|] (1 August 2009 – 27 January 2010)

			\|-
	==Protestant POV pushing at ]==
			\|] (27 January – 28 June 2010)
	Just thought you might be interested in ] attempts to push a Protestant POV at ], see for example . ] 19:43, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
			\|-

			\|] (5 July 2010 – 8 March 2017)
	== You're an Admin! ==
			\|-

			\|] (20 March 2018 – )
	It is my pleasure to inform you that you are now an admin. Congratulations. You can feel free to do everything you're supposed to do and nothing you're not supposed to do. If you haven't already, now is the time look through the ] and ]. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the ]. -- ] 06:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
			\|}

	:Congratulations! I didn't vote for you partly because I didn't realize how soon your RFA was closing and also because I have a policy of not supporting or opposing RFAs whose outcome is a foregone conclusion. Yours was clearly going to pass so I didn't vote.
	:BTW, let me take the opportunity to thank you for nominating me for adminship. Your good words were much appreciated.
	:--] 08:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

	::Congratulations on your recent adminship! I look forward to continuing to work with you in the future. :-) -] (]) 11:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

	:::Well done - all handled very nicely, & it was good to see how many had seen you around. A cunning move to persuade LM to do his wicked-fairy-at-the-christening number! :) All the best. ] 13:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

	Congrats. Very well-deserved, as the (virtually) unanimous support attests. Good luck with the buttons, and please let me know if there's anything with which I can give you a hand. I have a few tools at the bottom of my user page that I find handy for what I do (the COI bot, new pages, new accounts, category tracker, etc), but I'm sure you'll figure out what works best for you. If you do any speedy deletions, I ''highly'' recommend ] - it creates a one-click pull-down list of speedy-deletion rationales, so you don't have to type out the same deletion summaries over and over. Best of luck. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 17:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

	::::Hi Andrew! Congratulations from me as well. More than congratulations though, thank you! Thank you for offering to accept a measure of responsibility towards the Wiki project, its readers and editors. I have every confidence you will not only enjoy the new "adventure", but make substantial and lasting contributions in organization and policy.
	::::Also thank you for your contributions, they are the basis of your suitibility to admin service.
	::::Yes, I did see your addition at Oxy Pap and was delighted. I felt a twinge of pride to have found more documents than WW, but to be quite honest, I was more satisfied to know that others (namely you) could improve on that almost immediately. That's how scholarship works, many eyes on the target mean we catch everything, eventually. :D
	::::By the way, if your admin work could be assisted by my research at any time, please let me know. I can't promise I'll always have time, but you will certainly have one of my highest priorities.
	::::Well done! :D ] 00:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
	:::::I've been away for a few days so let me add my belated congrats! ] 06:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

	=="discussing"==
	I do not feel the need to discuss with a troll bent on ] and opprobriously vandalizing my userpage with spurious tags, . I do not ] since there is obvious evidence to the contrary. That being said I "discussed" my edits now. ,
	and
	.<b>]]</b> 16:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

	==Vandalism==
	It is interesting that you warned me but did not warn the editor who did violate the 3RR. As I stopped before violating the 3RR and reported it to the proper page this lack of followup on admins part is a little depressing. Added to this is the fact that this user continually blanked their talk page (which I reported twice), a vandalizing violation on its own, so there was no easy way to tell how often they had been warned about other violations before and you did not warn them about that either. The kind of nationalism that is going on on KB's page happens all of the time here on wikipedia and this page will, undoubtedly, return to its original form eventually. The lack of enforcement of basic wikipedia rules is, as I said, a bit sad and I don't blame you (I apologize for venting on your page), but it is wrong for me to be the only one who gets a warning when I am not the one violating policy, ] \| ] 01:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
	:Thank you for your followup message and for giving me the link the the 3RR page where I should have reported this in the first place. I appreciate the time that you took to get me straightened out on this situation. Enjoy your new admin duties and happy editing. ] \| ] 19:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
	==Hmmm==
	I was doing some tidying when I checked out ] and found that the article boldly claims that Anglicans consider the book canonical! This is such nonsense that I suspected it might be a recent addition by the only person I know to hold the view -- an anonymous editor at Wiki. Sure enough, there it was in the edit history. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to go around reverting all this user's edits. And if I did, I have every reason to expect an adminstrator would protect the pages and maybe block me! To be quite honest, we probably don't need to take any action. Such edits (I suspect the user has been systematic) will be reverted bit by bit as others edit the pages.

	Sorry to draw you in to this. It's a strange turn of fate. If you weren't admin I'd not even bother reporting this. I'd just point out the evidence next time the user tried to obstruct consensus forming at Template:OT. You know Wiki priorities and your own priorities better than I do, please stick to those. This is just a little thing for you to be aware of, not a specific request for action. Cheers. ] 01:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

	==Block evasion?==
	Would you mind keeping an eye on the article ]? ] first edited the article to replace the term "American terrorist" with "hero" (), then removed the term four more times (, , , ), leaving cryptic edit summaries. 64.85.245.43 was blocked, but, a few hours later, the edit was restored by ] (). Looking through the contribs of both IPs shows that they have both edited the same obscure article, ]. Do you think this is a sockpuppet, or an attempt to evade a block? -] (]) 04:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
	:That both IPs are from the same region further confirms my initial speculation. For the time being, though, I think I'll refrain from filing a sock report, because I don't know if one edit under a different IP would be considered a serious enough infraction to warrant further investigation. If the user makes the same edit again, under either IP, then I'll file a report, or request semi-protection. Thanks again! -] (]) 18:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

	== 3RR reporting ==

	Thanks. My mistake. I don't run into a lot of edit wars but I'll remember that next time I make a report. ] 22:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

	==Want to try again on ]?==
	It's been a bit since the FAC, and I think we were pretty close, even though the nom sort of came out of nowhere. The way I see it based on the FAC feedback, the only major content thing looks to be figuring out what to do with mentioning the apocrypha, and i've actually been using my local library lately for another article, and I know they have books on the subject if necessary. I may only have passing familiarity with super awesome historical scholarship type stuff, but I don't think the apocrypha would warrent too complicated a mention, (Not many of them even mention Jesus' life) so I think it would be easy to do if we (or, preferably, other people as well) worked together on it. The recent improvement of the Bah'ai section I think eliminates the last deficiency besides maybe the other views section, but that's probably something little anyway. What do you think, if we worked together on it for a few days or so, do you think we'd be able to make it an FA? I already started a section on the Apocrypha topic on the talk page, it looks like I was talking to the digital tumbleweeds though when I recommended and then implemented the removal of two sort of irrelevant sentences.... ] 03:07, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
	:I studied the FAC a good bit when it was close to done and finished, and it looks like several people agreed there needed to be more on the apocrypha, though I do feel everything else was pretty much taken care of, including the referencing problems. However, to tell you the truth, if someone who knows a bunch in this area like ] or someone agreed, i'd favor trying to argue in another FAC that an apocrypha section isn't really that important compared to all the other material, of all the works I know of that mention Jesus, several of them either say little about his life, or are obviously not trustworthy. Though, not being an expert in this area, I wouldn't want to start arguing with people just based on what i'm thinking alone. ] 03:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

	==See Talk==
	Please see talk . ] <sup>(] / ])</sup> 10:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	Hi,

	I would like you to review this edit which removes text entered by ]. I removed the text because it attempts to cast the East-West schism as a conflict between Eastern Orthodoxy and Western Arianism. I admit that I am not an expert in Christian history but this is an interpretation of history that I have never heard of.

			== Welcome back. ==
	Just wanted to bounce it off somebody else because I suspect this may become a point of contention and I wanted to make sure that I am on firm ground. I had not realized that the elite of the medieval German tribes were Arian but, according to the article on ], they were. This, however, does not support the theory that Germanic Arian tribes "conquered" the Western church.

			Welcome back, Andrew.
	--] 11:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

			I have you on my watchlist because you were a respected senior Wikipedian. I saw the BN notes about your adminship. Your first RfA was very successful, and I look forward to supporting your reconfirmation. —] (]) 02:23, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
	==]==
	Hi there. Good work with the closing; however, articles being merged cannot be deleted. A (sometimes protected) redirect has to be established instead per the ] to preserve edit history. — ''']]''' 02:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
	:Thanks for pinging me on the result of the AfD. I will work on merging the article's content into the main article if no one beats me to the punch. ] (] \| ]) 03:00, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
	:Ah it's okay. Usually the practice is to preserve the history on the actual article that is being redirected (it also makes it clear that a decision had been made in case any newcomers want to remake the article). Usually, the userfied article is copy-and-pasted.
	:By the way, nice work choosing a major AfD so early in your career. — ''']]''' 03:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
	::Indeed. The reason why I like merging things so much is that it makes everyone happy in most situations. It's so necessary to compromise on Misplaced Pages (even in some of the obvious scenerios), especially with our diverse body of editors. Sometimes by leading people on such trails, they'll learn by themselves why the policies are how they are. — ''']]''' 03:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

			:+1 ] <sup>]</sup> 03:11, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
	A minor point- please can you put the closing afd template right at the top (above the heading), so it fully closes out the afd debate on the log page. It's so the bot/scripts know it's closed. Cheers, ] 12:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
			*count me in. —<span style="font-size: 104%; letter-spacing:1.5pt;"><span class="monospaced" style="font-family: monospace, monospace;">usernamekiran]</span></span> 06:31, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

			== FYI on inactivity changes ==
	== ] map ==

			Hello Andrew c, just wanted to follow up with you directly from ]. First, welcome back! In February 2017 I personally sent you emails that were basically a copy of the notices you see above on the page. I only have the <code>Copy of your message to Andrew c: Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity</code> copies that the system generates, so I can't tell if they were successfully delivered, only that we tried. Certain mail providers were having trouble with wikimail, especially yahoo, and we have done some software work to improve this over time. You may want to try to email your self using wikimail to see if it is working now. As for the "5 year" rule, it is a new rule that got implemented just a couple of weeks ago (see ]). If you would like rollback or pending changes review flags on right now, let me know (please use {{t1\|ping}} if replying here) and I'll be happy to flip them for you, or just stop by ] whenever you want. Happy editing, — ] <sup>]</sup> 03:23, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
	Many thanks for the advice. I have done as you suggested. ] 15:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
			:Welcome back. We dont know each-other, I saw your thread at b'crat noticeboard. I hope you stay around. —<span style="font-size: 104%; letter-spacing:1.5pt;"><span class="monospaced" style="font-family: monospace, monospace;">usernamekiran]</span></span> 06:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

	== ~~WWE~~ ~~One~~ ~~Night~~ ~~Stand~~ ==		== Disagreed with the crats ==
	I have add a FUR for the pic, would it count as a revert if I removed the warning from the ONS article? ] 22:17, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

			I saw your post on the crat board, and their response. I flat disagree with them. You were a sysop, you have a clean record over here, no issues, and they didn't see fit to return your bit
	== My recent block ==
			to you ? Please! That's what ] is for. Suggesting that you go through an RFA, when which was extremely successful is unnecessary, in the least. ] R.I.P Trip Halstead 12:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
			:Seems punitive to me, and if that was the intent, great. Sounds like I need to earn it again, and as someone just testing the waters after finding out I was desysoped, how likely am I going to jump back in with gusto now? I guess there are 2 camps, the type of people who want to prove everyone wrong, and the type of people that will get pushed away. I'm likely the latter, in all honesty. But maybe I'll prove them wrong. -] </sup>]] 21:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

			== Further discussion ==
	Well, I blocked because the IP had vandalized over 20 times, and about 4 (based on the warnings) times after his block. I missed the part that he hadn't vandalized after the warning, but don't worry, I always check (forgot this time though... >_<). I'll leave the block in place though, because of his past (and sparse) vandalism (some users do that to evade blocks). Use common sense when blocking, that's my tip. :) · <font face="Times New Roman">] <sup>]</sup></font> 22:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
			In case anyone wants to join in . Feel free to join in. ] R.I.P Trip Halstead 13:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

			== ArbCom 2018 election voter message ==
	==]==

			{{Ivmbox\|Hello, Andrew c. Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
	I got bad vibes from reading the posts and was reluctant to join in - now I know why! ] 15:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
	==New article==
	I see you recently posted an item on the WikiProject Abortion noticeboard. Regarding the article ], its content was copied from of ], so it's not actually a new article. Do you think this qualifies are content-forking? Or do you think that the philosophical arguments which are only touched upon briefly in the recently-revised version of the "Debate" article warrant more in-depth coverage in a new spin-out? -] (]) 18:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

			If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. ] (]) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
	== My edits on ] ==
			\|Scale of justice 2.svg\|imagesize=40px}}
	Thanks for your advice Andrew, but I understood by the title of the article "Mass in the Catholic Chruch" that it was implicit that it described a Catholic understanding of their liturgy - it certainly read like that to me, and c.f. later it goes on to detail the Anglican theology of Mass/Communion/Eucharist etc. Given this structure to the article I didn't think it contrary to NPOV and didn't believe it necessary to explain that this is what Catholics are asked to believe at every point.
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2018/Coordination/MMS/01&oldid=866997855 -->
	<br>
	Thanks also for adding 'citation needed' re: the washing of hands - I am studied in Catholic theology and ligurgy, however I have - shall we say - "moved on" ;-) So better people than me will be more able to supply references. There exist no official reasons for this action in the liturgical documents, it is simply included in the rite.
	<br>
	I felt the emphasis on the presence of Christ in the communion was detrimental to the more accurate Catholic belief that Christ is <i>equally</i> present in the gathering, the proclamation of the Gospel and the person of the priest in the action of offering the sacrifice as much as in the consecrated host and wine. Essentially it is this that distinguishes Catholic belief in the substance of its liturgy from the celebrations of the various other Christian faiths.
	<br>
	Anyway, I'm a newbie editor, and hope I didn't cause any problems... am still finding my way.
	<br><br>
	Declan
	<br>
	] 22:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

			== ArbCom 2018 election voter message ==
	== Excuse me but... ==

			{{Ivmbox\|Hello, Andrew c. Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
	...do you mind finishing the job with Panairjadde socks? Please have a look at these edits and block the rest of the socks listed on the PPP page... Thanks --] 23:16, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

			The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
	==Black Widows==
	The article ] goes with the article ] don't move it, unless you can get a consensus, you should have discussed in on the talk page first. In addition, don't remove articles from categories that are under review for deletion ]. ] 23:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

			If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. ] (]) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
	==Long-term edits by anon==
			\|Scale of justice 2.svg\|imagesize=40px}}
	] has recently made a number of problematic edits throughout abortion-related articles, and, looking through this anon's , it becomes apparent that this IP has been making similar edits to abortion-related articles for over 2 years. Moreover, although it is a shared IP, I believe that an established Misplaced Pages editor may have been using this IP address to make these edits (see , which indicates use of the IP by an established user , the established user's own history of contributions to abortion-related articles, and the fact that the ] and the established editor's user page both mention a YMCA in Milwaukee). I feel that the similarities are too many for there not to be some connection. What do you think? -] (]) 02:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2018/Coordination/MMS/01&oldid=866997855 -->

			== Second Amendment sanctuary ==
	==HR-XML==

			I just left a comment on the ] concerning Marquette Co, MI and related matters. Please feel free to contribute to the discussion. --] (]) 06:13, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
	Andrew c wrote:
	<blockquote>
	I believe John Vandenberg makes the best case for notability, but I'm shocked that none of that made it into the actual article.
	</blockquote>

			== "A woman's right to choose" listed at ] ==
	Andrew,
			]
			A discussion is taking place to address the redirect ]. The discussion will occur at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --><span style="font-family:courier;font-size:90%"> -- ] (they/she) \| ]</span> 06:55, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
			==Orphaned non-free image File:Detective Megan Wheeler (Julianne Nicholson).jpg==
			] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).

			Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 17:46, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
	Before expressing such shock to readers of the HR-XML deletion discussion, I'd suggest that you survey the entries for other consortia. I don't believe the HR-XML article is any less substantiated than any of the other articles for peer organizations/formats that I mentioned. Consider (], ], ], ], ] the ], ], ], ], ], and ]).

			== ] nominated for delisting from ] ==
	You also need to consider the role of consortia as independent, consensus voices for the groups they represent. Is there anything in the article that you believe is shockingly unsubstantiated? Is there anything at all that is unsubstantiated? Isn't it reasonable for HR-XML to be the source of information for what HR-XML is, what is included in its specification library, and which companies are members? HR-XML's library is in motion. We've put out 10 releases in the last 5 years - the most recent being April 2007. Do I explain the content of one of our specifications by pointing to a book's explanation of the specification or the specification itself? Another role that HR-XML serves is to substantiate adoption through our certification program. You could find many more unsubstantiated claims and assertions of HR-XML adoption and compliance on the web and in literature. While there is always room for improvement, I don't see that there are issues covered in this article that are unsubstantiated or for which it is inappropriate for HR-XML to the source. If you have a different opinion, please list these items.

			Please see ]. ] 16:34, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
	This may not be part of wikipedia's current guidelines, but there is not any other sensible way to establish the notability of a consortium than to examine the notability of the consortium's members and documented adoption of the consortium's specifications within the particular market the organization is intended to serve.<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 00:32, 10 July 2007</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

			== CfD nomination at {{Section link\|Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1#Category:WikiProject X members}} ==
	==Stalking==
	Would you please stop wiki-stalking me through "My Contributions", thank you. ] 09:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

			<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''{{Section link\|Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1#Category:WikiProject X members}}''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd mass notify--> Thank you. ]] 09:32, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
	== Favor ==
			==] has been nominated for deletion==

			<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>] has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] 22:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
	Hi, could you help me? See ] and my talk page. Good night, – ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 04:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 22:37, 25 November 2024

This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Andrew c has not edited Misplaced Pages since 26 December 2019. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Talk Page Archives:
Archive 1 (9 February – 5 August 2006)
Archive 2 (17 June – 7 September 2006)
Archive 3 (8 September – 11 November 2006)
Archive 4 (11 November – 4 March 2007)
Archive 5 (6 March 2007 – 21 May 2007)
Archive 6 (22 May 2007 – 10 July 2007}
Archive 7 (10 July 2007 – 18 August 2007)
Archive 8 (20 August 2007 – 11 October 2007)
Archive 9 (10 October 2007 – 23 November 2007)
Archive 10 (24 November 2007 – 19 January 2008)
Archive 11 (23 January 2008 – 17 April 2008)
Archive 12 (19 April 2008 – 6 July 2008)
Archive 13 (7 July 2008 – 1 February 2009)
Archive 14 (3 February 2009 – 22 March 2009)
Archive 15 (26 March 2009 – 1 August 2009)
Archive 16 (1 August 2009 – 27 January 2010)
Archive 17 (27 January – 28 June 2010)
Archive 18 (5 July 2010 – 8 March 2017)
Archive 19 (20 March 2018 – )

Welcome back.

Welcome back, Andrew.

I have you on my watchlist because you were a respected senior Wikipedian. I saw the BN notes about your adminship. Your first RfA was very successful, and I look forward to supporting your reconfirmation. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:23, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

+1 Jehochman 03:11, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

count me in. —usernamekiran(talk) 06:31, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

FYI on inactivity changes

Hello Andrew c, just wanted to follow up with you directly from WP:BN. First, welcome back! In February 2017 I personally sent you emails that were basically a copy of the notices you see above on the page. I only have the Copy of your message to Andrew c: Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity copies that the system generates, so I can't tell if they were successfully delivered, only that we tried. Certain mail providers were having trouble with wikimail, especially yahoo, and we have done some software work to improve this over time. You may want to try to email your self using wikimail to see if it is working now. As for the "5 year" rule, it is a new rule that got implemented just a couple of weeks ago (see Special:PermaLink/831122935#RFC:_Slight_tweak_to_lengthy_inactivity_policy). If you would like rollback or pending changes review flags on right now, let me know (please use {{ping}} if replying here) and I'll be happy to flip them for you, or just stop by WP:PERM whenever you want. Happy editing, — xaosflux 03:23, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Welcome back. We dont know each-other, I saw your thread at b'crat noticeboard. I hope you stay around. —usernamekiran(talk) 06:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Disagreed with the crats

I saw your post on the crat board, and their response. I flat disagree with them. You were a sysop, you have a clean record over here, no issues, and they didn't see fit to return your bit to you ? Please! That's what WP:IAR is for. Suggesting that you go through an RFA, when You've already been through one which was extremely successful is unnecessary, in the least. ►К Ф Ƽ Ħ◄ R.I.P Trip Halstead 12:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Seems punitive to me, and if that was the intent, great. Sounds like I need to earn it again, and as someone just testing the waters after finding out I was desysoped, how likely am I going to jump back in with gusto now? I guess there are 2 camps, the type of people who want to prove everyone wrong, and the type of people that will get pushed away. I'm likely the latter, in all honesty. But maybe I'll prove them wrong. -Andrew c 21:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Further discussion

In case anyone wants to join in is right here on this board. Feel free to join in. ►К Ф Ƽ Ħ◄ R.I.P Trip Halstead 13:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Andrew c. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

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

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

Second Amendment sanctuary

I just left a comment on the Second Amendment sanctuary talk page concerning Marquette Co, MI and related matters. Please feel free to contribute to the discussion. --Mox La Push (talk) 06:13, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

"A woman's right to choose" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect A woman's right to choose. The discussion will occur at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 13#"Right to choose" redirects until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 06:55, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Detective Megan Wheeler (Julianne Nicholson).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Detective Megan Wheeler (Julianne Nicholson).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:46, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Lemon-edit1.jpg nominated for delisting from Misplaced Pages:Featured pictures

Please see Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/delist/Lemon. MER-C 16:34, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

CfD nomination at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkl talk 09:32, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Category:NCAA Division I men's lacrosse tournament venues has been nominated for deletion

Category:NCAA Division I men's lacrosse tournament venues has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 22:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Categories: