Misplaced Pages

User talk:SusanLesch

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bobak (talk | contribs) at 17:19, 13 December 2007 (→RE: Quesiton (Leonid Hurwicz) 2: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:19, 13 December 2007 by Bobak (talk | contribs) (→RE: Quesiton (Leonid Hurwicz) 2: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SusanLesch.

Archive | User page | IANAL

This user is a U.S. citizen, native English speaker, former Flickr user (occasionally public domain, proprietary or copyrighted but usually CC) and Wikimedia user. Web: TEXTET.
Raccoon by Darkone


RE: Quesiton (Leonid Hurwicz) 2

Hi Susan, I apologize for completely forgetting to respond --I have a bad habit of not following up on discussion pages (or any pages) that aren't on my watchlist. I came back on Monday and sort of went back to my semi-zombie-like state ("the Mondays") at the office. Working at the Dome must've been interesting, especially since it has all the features to make it usable for different sports. I didn't know you graduated from the U, what area? As for the talk points today: I'm a little confused as what you mean regarding the George Lucas article, did I make a mistake? --if so please let me know and I'll work on fixing it. As for the Star Tribune article, other than adding the photo I haven't really paid much attention to it --its not on my watchlist (neither is Lucas), most of those are just things I've created or done substantial edits to. It seems like that Star Tribune article got caught in a lot of miscommunication, though User:Beaker342 seems to be getting a bit testy. I'll start a discussion on the NY Times talk page to help get actual consensus rather than two editors on two sides, which is unproductive. Sorry again for not replying to the previous discussion, its a bit embarrassing for me. --Bobak (talk) 17:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)