Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
:I don't understand. How can you assume that only one line can be written about a large-scale commando operation? --'']] ]'' 04:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
:I don't understand. How can you assume that only one line can be written about a large-scale commando operation? --'']] ]'' 04:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
::Its called "non-notable" when there's not enough material for any article. Read up on the policies. --] <sup>(]•])</sup> 04:43, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
This page has archives. Sections older than 25 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
RfA
Brewcrewer! Thank you very much for your support in my RfA, which passed yesterday. I hope not to let you and the others down, and use the tools for the benefit of the project. Cheers, Ynhockey22:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi - AfD is here. The previous article was definitely NN (in fact it was probably a speedy - one sentence) but the current one is much better, so I wouldn't G4 it anyway. It's certainly got reliable sources and might even squeak past WP:MUSIC (national tour?) Black Kite11:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: Boodlesthecat block
I think it wasn't, as I've already mentioned on Boodles' page. I agree with Tiptoety's assessment of the situation. Hersfold03:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
No no no because then we would jinx them. They owe me a good birthday present next week, and I'm actually rooting for the little boys tonight just because I want a cushion over the Redskins before we play them in two weeks. Dallas has a whole month to fall off before 12/14. StarM23:52, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
November 23, I wouldn't expect anything less of a birthday present on wiki. Oh no, I linked a date, are the date police going to come after me now? StarM00:19, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
You'll just never know will you :p With as late as baseball is starting next Spring they may well be playing on my birthday as well StarM01:20, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Definition of involvement
The definition of involvement for the I-P editing restrictions is here. There isn't any mechanism to make a proposal of the type you suggested. PhilKnight (talk) 22:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Well a full reading of the linked paragraph surely shows that there is a "mechanism" for the proposal. Indeed, it would be very un-Misplaced Pages like for a rule to go forward because there is no mechanism for it undoing. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)22:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
No, the proposal was valid because it was just that - a proposal. How I would go about manifesting the proposal (if I choose to) is a different story. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)22:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
It seems to me that you are trying to wriggle out of this, rather than just admit you made a mistake. What I'm saying is that I'm not going to respond to your proposal on the WP:AE page because it's invalid. PhilKnight (talk) 22:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm not trying to wiggle myself out of anything. Of course I didn't know about the specific procedure of moving an admin from an uninvolved status to an involved status. But specific procedure is never an impediment here at Misplaced Pages. Once the proposal is put forward and accepted by a consensus, the correct avenue for manifesting the proposal will take care of itself.. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)23:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
As I have tried to explain, that isn't correct. If you carefully read the paragraph, there isn't any such mechanism. If you want the last word on this, then by all means go ahead and take it. However, that doesn't alter the fact you are wrong, and your proposal is invalid. PhilKnight (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah and JD was helping me. People don't get the "don't connect the two user names" and this is an indigent meatpuppet who's irritating me as well. He's been final warned, luckily. I don't care about your "vandalism" but the timing was such that it blanked the content I was restoring. StarM22:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
When I "vandalized" your page it was empty. I was in a state of hysteria because I thought you were leaving us again :-) Why don't you block that IP ? It seems like he is up to pretty egregious stuff. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)22:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure where in the article this information should belong, but it seems just as noteworthy here as in the Greenspan or Bernanke articles. I added the category, but couldn't find an appropriate place in the article. Given that there is a reliable source for this information, please don't revert this information. Adlerschloß (talk) 04:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
I know why people are putting that edit in; it's an attempt to be "first" with an edit identifying something. The religion of the officiant at a wedding is not necessarily indicative of the religion of the participants (or even one of them). I'm not reverting, because this is at least better than outright stating a religion, but I do feel like this is pretty close to a WP:WEASEL way of getting information in the article that wouldn't otherwise make it. It is cited, though, (and I know you're not pushing any POV) so I'll move on. Frank | talk 00:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I don't know, I think it's pretty informative. It at least tells us that even if he isn't Christian he had no problem with Christian clergy conducting his wedding ceremony. Whoever cares about his religion/ethnicity this information will be a big deal. I also think that most readers will be intelligent enough to understand that it does mean that he is Christian. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)00:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I try not to think about things (that's why I spend so much time on WP) so this was a tough one for me. I finally figured out that I should just Google the term, and then, lo and behold, I got it. This Google thing, it's not bad. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)01:23, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Ah, happy to see you've got the piece out. How was it? My greatest personal dilemmas are whether to eat the pastrami pieces I find under my car seats. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)22:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
CfD nomination of Category:Franklin D. Roosevelt Administration
Thanks. My intention was just to get the creator's attention and see what s/he has to say. If they had no problem with it I was just going to go ahead and merge it. It's not something that requires a major discussion. However, I now realized that the current info in the article is incorrect. It wasn't the Nariman House operations that were called Black Tornado. All the commando operations were included in that named operation. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)18:27, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
You're just getting caught up in the emotional drama. Sure it was a big operation, but what content about it do we have to justify its own article other than a single line? That and all the rest of the links and stuff are all about the other article November 2008 Mumbai attacks. You just want to see that name in the page title, thats all. Do you want to bet that this wont work out like you want it to? Somoene else will deal with this. Go ahead, I'm not bothered to bicker over this, do what you like. --Matt5704:36, 30 November 2008 (UTC)